IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/ratsoc/v20y2008i1p5-30.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does Shared Group Membership Promote Altruism?

Author

Listed:
  • Toshio Yamagishi

    (Graduate School of Letters, Hokkaido University, N10 W7 Kita-ku, Sapporo, Japan 060-0810, toshio@let.hokudai.ac.jp)

  • Nobuhiro Mifune

    (Department of Behavioral Science at Hokkaido University, Japan)

Abstract

Two explanations of why shared group membership promotes cooperation in social dilemmas were compared. According to the fear—greed model of social identity proposed by Simpson (2006), shared group membership reduces greed but not fear and, thus, should promote altruistic behavior toward in-group members in the absence of fear. According to the group heuristic model proposed by Yamagishi and colleagues, altruistic behavior toward in-group members is a `ticket' to enter a generalized exchange system; people are not predicted to behave altruistically when it is made salient that no system of generalized exchange operates in the group. We tested these models in a dictator game experiment with two conditions. In the common knowledge condition, either model predicts greater altruism toward in-group recipients. In the unilateral knowledge condition — when the dictator knows the group membership of the recipient, but the recipient does not know the membership of the dictator — the fear—greed model predicts greater altruism toward ingroup recipients. In contrast, the group heuristic model does not predict such in-group bias in altruism. The results of the experiment support the group heuristic model.

Suggested Citation

  • Toshio Yamagishi & Nobuhiro Mifune, 2008. "Does Shared Group Membership Promote Altruism?," Rationality and Society, , vol. 20(1), pages 5-30, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:ratsoc:v:20:y:2008:i:1:p:5-30
    DOI: 10.1177/1043463107085442
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1043463107085442
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1043463107085442?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wit, Arjaan P. & Wilke, Henk A. M., 1992. "The effect of social categorization on cooperation in three types of social dilemmas," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 135-151, March.
    2. Nahoko Hayashi & Elinor Ostrom & James Walker & Toshio Yamagishi, 1999. "Reciprocity, Trust, And The Sense Of Control," Rationality and Society, , vol. 11(1), pages 27-46, February.
    3. Brent Simpson, 2006. "Social Identity and Cooperation in Social Dilemmas," Rationality and Society, , vol. 18(4), pages 443-470, November.
    4. Toshio Yamagishi & Shigeru Terai & Toko Kiyonari & Nobuhiro Mifune & Satoshi Kanazawa, 2007. "The Social Exchange Heuristic: Managing Errors in Social Exchange," Rationality and Society, , vol. 19(3), pages 259-291, August.
    5. Poppe, Matthijs & Utens, Lisbeth, 1986. "Effects of greed and fear of being gypped in a social dilemma situation with changing pool size," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 61-73, March.
    6. Ahn, T K & Ostrom, Elinor & Shupp, Robert & Walker, James, 2001. "Cooperation in PD Games: Fear, Greed, and History of Play," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 106(1-2), pages 137-155, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marie-Laure Cabon-Dhersin & Nathalie Etchart-Vincent, 2012. "The puzzle of cooperation in a game of chicken: an experimental study," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 72(1), pages 65-87, January.
    2. Płatkowski, Tadeusz, 2023. "Cooperation in two-player social dilemmas with other-regarding orientations," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    3. Gong, Binglin & Yang, Chun-Lei, 2019. "Cooperation through indirect reciprocity: The impact of higher-order history," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 316-341.
    4. Christoph Engel & Lilia Zhurakhovska, 2016. "When is the risk of cooperation worth taking? The prisoner’s dilemma as a game of multiple motives," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(16), pages 1157-1161, November.
    5. Lin Tao & Wing-tung Au, 2014. "Values, self and other-regarding behavior in the dictator game," Rationality and Society, , vol. 26(1), pages 46-72, February.
    6. Michael Razen & Matthias Stefan, 2016. "Greed: Taking a Deadly Sin to the Lab," Working Papers 2016-27, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck, revised Aug 2018.
    7. Katharina Werner & Ahmed Skali, 2023. "Violent Conflict and Parochial Trust: Lab-in-the-Field and Survey Evidence," HiCN Working Papers 404, Households in Conflict Network.
    8. Marco LiCalzi & Roland Mühlenbernd, 2022. "Feature-weighted categorized play across symmetric games," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(3), pages 1052-1078, June.
    9. Hamet SARR & Mohamed Ali BCHIR & François COCHARD & Anne ROZAN, 2021. "Is the “average Pigouvian tax” robust to the size of the group of polluters?," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 102(3), pages 285-295, September.
    10. Jacob Dijkstra, 2012. "Explaining contributions to public goods: Formalizing the social exchange heuristic," Rationality and Society, , vol. 24(3), pages 324-342, August.
    11. Rompf, Stephan Alexander, 2014. "System Trust and Cooperation: The Case of Recycling Behavior," MPRA Paper 60279, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Peter Kurrild-Klitgaard, 2010. "Exit, collective action and polycentric political systems," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 143(3), pages 339-352, June.
    13. Declerck, Carolyn H. & Kiyonari, Toko & Boone, Christophe, 2009. "Why do responders reject unequal offers in the Ultimatum Game? An experimental study on the role of perceiving interdependence," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 335-343, June.
    14. Gregor Schwerhoff, 2013. "Leadership and International Climate Cooperation," Working Papers 2013.97, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    15. Susann Fiedler & Dshamilja Marie Hellmann & Angela Rachael Dorrough & Andreas Glöckner, 2018. "Cross-national in-group favoritism in prosocial behavior: Evidence from Latin and North America," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 13(1), pages 42-60, January.
    16. Gabriele Chierchia & Fabio Tufano & Giorgio Coricelli, 2017. "Friends or Strangers? Strategic Uncertainty and Cooperation across Experimental Games of Strategic Complements and Substitutes," Discussion Papers 2017-03, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    17. Krupka, Erin & Weber, Roberto A., 2009. "The focusing and informational effects of norms on pro-social behavior," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 307-320, June.
    18. Luisa Faust & Maura Kolbe & Sasan Mansouri & Paul P. Momtaz, 2022. "The Crowdfunding of Altruism," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-29, March.
    19. Carsten K W De Dreu & Shaul Shalvi & Lindred L Greer & Gerben A Van Kleef & Michel J J Handgraaf, 2012. "Oxytocin Motivates Non-Cooperation in Intergroup Conflict to Protect Vulnerable In-Group Members," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(11), pages 1-7, November.
    20. Tjaša Bjedov & Simon Lapointe & Thierry Madiès & Marie Claire Villeval, 2018. "Does decentralization of decisions increase the stability of large groups?," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 51(4), pages 681-716, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:ratsoc:v:20:y:2008:i:1:p:5-30. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.