- P-ISSN 2586-0755
- E-ISSN 2799-8444
논문 상세
Home > 논문 상세
공공재 딜레마에서 일탈적 집단구성원에 대한 반응
Different Reactions to Deviant Group Members in the Public Goods Dilemma
한국심리학회지: 코칭 / 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
(연세대학교)
김보라.
(2019). 공공재 딜레마에서 일탈적 집단구성원에 대한 반응. 한국심리학회지: 코칭, 3(2), 41-63, https://doi.org/10.51457/kjcp.2019.12.3.2.41
- 다운로드 수
- 조회수
초록
일탈적 집단구성원에 대한 태도를 연구한 기존연구의 결과는 크게 둘로 나뉜다. 규범에 반 하는 행동을 보이는 구성원보다 규범을 과잉 준수하는 구성원을 더 선호한다는 주장(예: Abrams 등, 2000)과 일반 규범에서 벗어난 일탈적 행동을 보이면 어느 구성원이든 부정적으 로 평가하고 퇴출하려 한다는 주장(예: Parks와 Stone, 2010)이 그것이다. 본 연구는 선행연구 에서 나타난 이런 결과의 차이가 집단과제의 특성 때문이었을 것이라 보고, 집단 간 공공재 딜레마 게임 과제를 사용해 일탈적 구성원에 대한 반응을 알아보았다. 그 결과, 한 구성원이 개인과 집단의 수행을 심각하게 저해할 때 나머지 집단구성원은 비용을 치러서라도 그 이기 적 구성원(반규범적 일탈자)을 내보내려고 하였다. 반대로, 이타적 구성원(친규범적 일탈자)에 대해서는 집단 수행과 집단의 사기에 긍정적인 영향을 미치므로 집단에 남기를 원했다. 이 기적 구성원을 퇴출코자 하는 의도는 집단 내에 이타적 구성원이 없을 때보다 있을 때 더 강하게 나타났다. 이 결과는 친규범적인 혹은 반규범적인 일탈적 집단구성원에 관한 우리의 판단과 반응에 집단과제의 이익충돌 속성이 주요한 영향을 미칠 수 있음을 시사한다.
- keywords
- 사회적 배제, 이기적, 이타적, 공공재 딜레마, 집단 경쟁, 이익충돌
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
참고문헌
1
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.
2
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
3
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
4
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.
5
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.
6
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
7
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
8
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
9
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
10
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
11
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
12
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
13
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
14
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
15
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
16
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
17
Fehr, E., & Gächter, S. (2002). Altruistic punishment in humans. Nature, 415(6868), 137-140. https://doi.org/10.1038/415137a
18
Fehr, E., & Gächter, S. (2005). Human behaviour:Egalitarian motive and altruistic punishment (reply). Nature, 433(7021), E1-E2. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature03257
19
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
20
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
21
Herrmann, B., Thoni, C., & Gächter, S. (2008). Antisocial punishment across societies. Science, 319(5868), 1362-1367. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1153808
22
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
23
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.
24
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
25
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
26
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
27
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
28
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
29
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
30
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
31
Murphy, R. O., Ackermann, K. A., & Handgraaf, M. (2011). Measuring social value orientation. Judgment and Decision Making, 6(8), 771-781.
32
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
33
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
34
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
35
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.
36
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
37
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
38
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
- 투고일Submission Date
- 2019-11-06
- 수정일Revised Date
- 2019-12-27
- 게재확정일Accepted Date
- 2019-12-28
권호 내 다른 논문
추천 논문
학술지 홈페이지 이용 환경은 크롬 브라우저 사용을 권장합니다.