Different Reactions to Deviant Group Members in the Public Goods Dilemma

김보라

doi:10.51457/kjcp.2019.12.3.2.41

Log In/Sign Up
KOREAN
P-ISSN2586-0755
E-ISSN2799-8444
KCI

Home

Browse Articles

Article Detail

Home > Article Detail

P-ISSN 2586-0755
E-ISSN 2799-8444

e-Submission

Vol.3, No.2

Citation Share

Different Reactions to Deviant Group Members in the Public Goods Dilemma

KOREAN JOURNAL OF COACHING PSYCHOLOGY / KOREAN JOURNAL OF COACHING PSYCHOLOGY, (P)2586-0755; (E)2799-8444

2019, v.3 no.2, pp.41-63

https://doi.org/10.51457/kjcp.2019.12.3.2.41

(2019). Different Reactions to Deviant Group Members in the Public Goods Dilemma. KOREAN JOURNAL OF COACHING PSYCHOLOGY, 3(2), 41-63, https://doi.org/10.51457/kjcp.2019.12.3.2.41

copy

Downloaded
Viewed

PDF Download

Abstract

There have been contradictory findings concerning our attitude toward deviant group members; some argue that pro-norm deviants are preferred to anti-norm deviants (e.g., Abrams et al., 2000); others propose that any type of deviant is negatively evaluated to be the target of expulsion (e.g., Parks & Stone, 2010). This article argues that group task conditions could cause these conflicting findings. Employing a revised intergroup public goods dilemma game, this study found that people were willing to expel a selfish member (an anti-norm deviant) even by sacrificing their own income when the deviant’s actions seriously deteriorated the group performance as well as their personal performance. By contrast, people hoped to retain an altruistic member (a pro-norm deviant) as the deviant’s behavior was beneficial to them and had a positive influence on team morale. The intention to expel a selfish member became stronger when an altruistic member being in the same group than when no altruistic person being in the group. Results suggest that conflicts of interests as a group task feature can be a critical factor to influence people’s judgment and reaction to pro-norm and anti-norm deviants.

keywords: social exclusion, selfish, unselfish, public goods dilemma, group competition, conflicts of interest

Reference

Abrams, D., Marques, J., Bown, N., & Dougill, M. (2002). Anti-norm and pro-norm deviance in the bank and on the campus: Two experiments on subjective group dynamics. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 5(2), 163-182.

Abrams, D., Marques, J. M., Bown, N., &Henson, M. (2000). Pro-norm and anti-norm deviance within and between groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(5), 906-912. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.78. 5.906

Abrams, D., Rutland, A., Cameron, L., & Ferrell, J. (2007). Older but wilier: In-group accountability and the development of subjective group dynamics. Developmental Psychology, 43(1), 134-148. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.43.1.134

Asch, S. E. (1951). Effects of group pressure upon the modification and distortion of judgments. In H. Guetzkow (Ed.), Groups, leadership and men (pp. 177-190). Pittsburgh, PA, US:Carnegie Press.

Au, W. T., & Kwong, J. Y. Y. (2004). Measurements and effects of social-value orientation in social dilemmas: A review. In R. Suleiman, D. V. Budescu, I. Fischer, & D. M. Messick (Eds.), Contemporary psychological research on social dilemmas (pp. 71-98). New York, NY, US: Cambridge University Press.

Bahry, D. L., & Wilson, R. K. (2006). Confusion or fairness in the field? Rejections in the ultimatum game under the strategy method. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 60(1), 37-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JEBO. 2004.07.005

Balliet, D., Parks, C., & Joireman, J. (2009). Social value orientation and cooperation in social dilemmas: A meta-analysis. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 12(4), 533-547. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 2 3 0 7 / 2 6 6 7 0 5 2 . 2000-13030-00210.2307/2667052

Balliet, D., Wu, J., & De Dreu, C. K. W. (2014). Ingroup favoritism in cooperation: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 140(6), 1556-1581. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037737

Bornstein, G. (1992). The free-rider problem in intergroup conflicts over step-level and continuous public goods. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(4), 597-606. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.62.4.597

Bornstein, G., & Ben-Yossef, M. (1994). Cooperation in intergroup and single-group social dilemmas. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 30(1), 52-67. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.1994.1003

Bornstein, G., Erev, I., & Goren, H. (1994). The Effect of repeated play in the IPG and IPD team games. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 38(4), 690-707. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/0022002794038004005

Bornstein, G., Gneezy, U., & Nagel, R. (2002). The effect of intergroup competition on group coordination: An experimental study. Games and Economic Behavior, 41(1), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0899-8256(02)00012-X

Buss, A. H., & Perry, M. (1992). The Aggression questionnaire. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(3), 452-459. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.63.3.452

Czerwonka, M. (2019). Cultural, cognitive and personality traits in risk-taking behaviour:evidence from Poland and the United States of America. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 32(1), 894-908. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2019.1588766

Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. B. (1955). A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51(3), 629-636. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046408

Do, K. T., Guassi Moreira, J. F., & Telzer, E. H. (2017). But is helping you worth the risk? Defining prosocial risk taking in adolescence. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 25, 260-271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2016.11.008

Fehr, E., & Gächter, S. (2002). Altruistic punishment in humans. Nature, 415(6868), 137-140. https://doi.org/10.1038/415137a

Fehr, E., & Gächter, S. (2005). Human behaviour:Egalitarian motive and altruistic punishment (reply). Nature, 433(7021), E1-E2. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature03257

Gunnthorsdottir, A., & Rapoport, A. (2006). Embedding social dilemmas in intergroup competition reduces free-riding. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 101(2), 184-199. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.obhdp.2005.08.005

Hennig-Schmidt, H., Li, Z.-Y., & Yang, C. (2008). Why people reject advantageous offers-Non-monotonic strategies in ultimatum bargaining: Evaluating a video experiment run in PR China. Journal of Economic Behavior &Organization, 65(2), 373-384. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JEBO.2005.10.003

Herrmann, B., Thoni, C., & Gächter, S. (2008). Antisocial punishment across societies. Science, 319(5868), 1362-1367. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1153808

Irwin, K., & Horne, C. (2013). A normative explanation of antisocial punishment. Social Science Research, 42(2), 562-570. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SSRESEARCH.2012.10.004

John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big Five Trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In L. A. Pervin & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 102-138). New York, NY, US: Guilford Press.

Kerr, N. L., Rumble, A. C., Park, E. S., Ouwerkerk, J. W., Parks, C. D., Gallucci, M., & van Lange, P. A. M. (2009). “How many bad apples does it take to spoil the whole barrel?” Social exclusion and toleration for bad apples. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(4), 603-613. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.02.017

Kline, R., Bankert, A., Levitan, L., & Kraft, P. (2019). Personality and prosocial behavior: A multilevel meta-analysis. Political Science Research and Methods, 7(1), 125-142. https://doi.org/10.1017/psrm.2017.14

Lipkus, I. (1991). The construction and preliminary validation of a global belief in a just world scale and the exploratory analysis of the multidimensional belief in a just world scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 12(11), 1171-1178. http://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(91)90081-L

Marques, J. M., Abrams, D., Paez, D., &Martinez-Taboada, C. (1998). The role of categorization and in-group norms in judgments of groups and their members. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(4), 976-988. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.75.4.976

McGhee, R. L., Ehrler, D. J., Buckhalt, J. A., &Phillips, C. (2012). The Relation between five-factor personality traits and risk-taking behavior in preadolescents. Psychology, 3(8), 558-561. https://doi.org/10.4236/psych.2012.38083

Mendoza, S. A., Lane, S. P., & Amodio, D. M. (2014). For members only. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 5(6), 662-670. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550614527115

Monin, B., Sawyer, P. J., & Marquez, M. J. (2008). The rejection of moral rebels:Resenting those who do the right thing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(1), 76-93. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.95.1.76

Murphy, R. O., Ackermann, K. A., & Handgraaf, M. (2011). Measuring social value orientation. Judgment and Decision Making, 6(8), 771-781.

Nicholson, N., Soane, E., Fenton‐O’Creevy, M., & Willman, P. (2005). Personality and domain‐specific risk taking. Journal of Risk Research, 8(2), 157-176. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 1366987032000123856

Parks, C. D., & Stone, A. B. (2010). The desire to expel unselfish members from the group. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99(2), 303-310. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018403

Rapoport, A., Bornstein, G., & Erev, I. (1989). Intergroup competition for public goods:Effects of unequal resources and relative group size. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56(5), 748-756. https://doi.org /10.1037/0022-3514.56.5.748

Stephan, W. G., & Stephan, C. W. (2000). An integrated threat theory of prejudice. In S. Oskamp (Ed.), Reducing prejudice and discrimination (pp. 23-45). New York, NY, US: Psychology Press.

Tasimi, A., Dominguez, A., & Wynn, K. (2015). Do-gooder derogation in children: the social costs of generosity. Frontiers in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01036

van der Lee, R., Ellemers, N., Scheepers, D., &Rutjens, B. T. (2017). In or out? How the perceived morality (vs. competence) of prospective group members affects acceptance and rejection. European Journal of Social Psychology, 47(6), 748-762. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2269

van Dijk, E., Molenmaker, W. E., & de Kwaadsteniet, E. W. (2015). Promoting cooperation in social dilemmas: The use of sanctions. Current Opinion in Psychology, 6, 118-122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.07.006