How the Distribution of Member Expectations Influences Cooperation and Competition in Groups: A Social Relations Model Analysis of Social Dilemmas

2018 ◽  
Vol 44 (10) ◽  
pp. 1502-1518 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jared L. Ladbury ◽  
Verlin B. Hinsz
Keyword(s):  
Social Relations ◽  
Social Dilemmas ◽  
Group Behavior ◽  
Group Level ◽  
Social Relations Model ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Social Projection ◽  
Group Outcomes ◽  
The Social ◽  
Group Members

Group outcomes are difficult to model and predict using individual-level metrics. We use shared cognition concepts and the social relations model to predict cooperative group outcomes in two social dilemmas to test whether social projection or consensus among group members would best predict cooperation. Group-level variance components derived from the social relations model were used as indices of social projection and consensus. Groups played five rounds of two social dilemmas and predicted their partners’ behavior on the following round. Results demonstrate that participants expect other group members to respond to the situation like the participant will and that shared expectations predict less competitive group behavior, but only when group members’ expectations have little to no variance. This article demonstrates the utility of the social relations model in predicting group-level outcomes from individual inputs, as well as providing novel findings regarding the complex effects of shared expectations on collective outcomes.

scholarly journals Do Perceiver Effects in Interpersonal Perception Predict Cooperation in Social Dilemmas?

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Rau ◽  
Isabel Thielmann ◽  
Simon M. Breil ◽  
Katharina Geukes ◽  
Sascha Krause ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Social Relations ◽  
Social Dilemmas ◽  
Social Dilemma ◽  
Interpersonal Perception ◽  
Public Goods Game ◽  
Future Directions ◽  
Social Relations Model ◽  
The Social ◽  
Higher Power ◽  
Perceiver Effects

People’s general tendencies to view others as cold-hearted and manipulative (rather than affectionate and trustworthy) may explain defection in social dilemma situations. To capture idiosyncratic tendencies in other-perceptions, we collected mutual judgments in groups of unacquainted individuals in two studies (N1 = 83, N2 = 413) and extracted perceiver effect scores using the Social Relations Model. In both studies, participants later played a public goods game. In Study 1, perceiver effects predicted cooperation beyond self-reported and group-related control variables. However, results were not replicated in a preregistered second study with higher power and a more diverse sample. We discuss implicit group norms as a likely explanation for the inconsistent findings and suggest future directions for addressing generalized expectations in social dilemmas.

Collective Self-Determination: How the Agent of Help Promotes Pride, Well-Being, and Support for Intergroup Helping

2017 ◽  
Vol 43 (5) ◽  
pp. 662-677 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma F. Thomas ◽  
Catherine E. Amiot ◽  
Winnifred R. Louis ◽  
Alice Goddard
Keyword(s):  
Well Being ◽  
Self Determination Theory ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Group Level ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
The Social ◽  
Collective Group ◽  
Collective Self ◽  
Group Members ◽  
Social Identity Approach

This research integrates self-determination theory and the social identity approach to investigate the notion of collective (group level) self-determination, and to test how the agent of intergroup help (helping initiated by a group representative versus group members) shapes group members’ motives and support for intergroup helping. Study 1 ( N = 432) demonstrates that collective self-determination predicts support for intergroup helping, group pride, and well-being, over and above individual-level self-determined motivation. Study 2 ( N = 216) confirmed that helping by group members was seen as more collectively self-determined than helping by a group representative, producing effects on pride, well-being, and support. Study 3 ( N = 124) explores a qualifier of these effects: People who identify more strongly with the leader who is providing the help also experience representative helping as more collectively self-determined, thereby promoting well-being, group pride, and support. Findings highlight the value of integrating self-determination theory with intergroup theories to consider collective aspects of self-determination.

Pluralistic Ignorance Research in Psychology: A Scoping Review of Topic and Method Variation and Directions for Future Research

2021 ◽  
pp. 108926802199516
Author(s):  
Rikki H. Sargent ◽  
Leonard S. Newman
Keyword(s):  
Scoping Review ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Pluralistic Ignorance ◽  
Group Level ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Group Members

Pluralistic ignorance occurs when group members mistakenly believe others’ cognitions and/or behaviors are systematically different from their own. More than 20 years have passed since the last review of pluralistic ignorance from a psychological framework, with more than 60 empirical articles assessing pluralistic ignorance published since then. Previous reviews took an almost entirely conceptual approach with minimal review of methodology, making existing reviews outdated and limited in the extent to which they can provide guidelines for researchers. The goal of this review is to evaluate and integrate the literature on pluralistic ignorance, clarify important conceptual issues, identify inconsistencies in the literature, and provide guidance for future research. We provide a comprehensive definition for the phenomenon, with a focus on its status as a group-level phenomenon. We highlight three areas of variation in particular in the current scoping review: variation in topics assessed, variation in measurement, and (especially) variation in methods for assessing the implications of individual-level misperceptions that, in aggregate, lead to pluralistic ignorance. By filling these gaps in the literature, we ultimately hope to motivate further analysis of the phenomenon.

A description and illustration of the Triadic Relations Model: Who perceives whom as bullying whom?

2010 ◽  
Vol 34 (4) ◽  
pp. 374-383 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noel A. Card ◽  
Philip C. Rodkin ◽  
Claire F. Garandeau
Keyword(s):  
Peer Relations ◽  
Social Relations ◽  
Fourth Grade ◽  
Social Relations Model ◽  
Interpersonal Behaviors ◽  
The Social ◽  
Peer Nominations ◽  
Dyadic Variables

Analyses of children’s peer relations have recently begun considering interpersonal behaviors and perceptions from the perspective of the Social Relations Model. An extension of this model, the Triadic Relations Model (TRM), allows for consideration and analysis of more complex three-person data to understand triadic processes; separate individual, dyadic, and triadic variance; and model co-occurrences among dyadic phenomena. The goal of this article is to provide a didactic introduction to the TRM and its potential for studying peer relations. The TRM is applied to data from nine classes (N = 162) of third and fourth grade boys and girls involving perceptions (peer nominations) of actors’ (aggressors’) behavior toward partners (victims). We report and illustrate interpretation of 7 variance and 16 covariance estimates from this TRM analysis of who perceives whom as bullying whom. In particular, triadic analyses revealed a tendency for children to perceive others as sharing the same aggressors and the same targets for aggression as themselves. We discuss implications of findings for studying aggression, as well as extensions of this model, such as incorporating multiple constructs or connecting the TRM estimates with individual and dyadic variables, and challenges of using the TRM.

scholarly journals Neural precursors of future liking and affective reciprocity

2018 ◽  
Vol 115 (17) ◽  
pp. 4375-4380 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noam Zerubavel ◽  
Mark Anthony Hoffman ◽  
Adam Reich ◽  
Kevin N. Ochsner ◽  
Peter Bearman
Keyword(s):  
Social Relations ◽  
Neural Responses ◽  
Neural Data ◽  
Social Network Data ◽  
The Social ◽  
Interaction Partners ◽  
Group Members ◽  
Flexible Framework ◽  
Predictive Strength ◽  
Group Member

Why do certain group members end up liking each other more than others? How does affective reciprocity arise in human groups? The prediction of interpersonal sentiment has been a long-standing pursuit in the social sciences. We combined fMRI and longitudinal social network data to test whether newly acquainted group members’ reward-related neural responses to images of one another’s faces predict their future interpersonal sentiment, even many months later. Specifically, we analyze associations between relationship-specific valuation activity and relationship-specific future liking. We found that one’s own future (T2) liking of a particular group member is predicted jointly by actor’s initial (T1) neural valuation of partner and by that partner’s initial (T1) neural valuation of actor. These actor and partner effects exhibited equivalent predictive strength and were robust when statistically controlling for each other, both individuals’ initial liking, and other potential drivers of liking. Behavioral findings indicated that liking was initially unreciprocated at T1 yet became strongly reciprocated by T2. The emergence of affective reciprocity was partly explained by the reciprocal pathways linking dyad members’ T1 neural data both to their own and to each other’s T2 liking outcomes. These findings elucidate interpersonal brain mechanisms that define how we ultimately end up liking particular interaction partners, how group members’ initially idiosyncratic sentiments become reciprocated, and more broadly, how dyads evolve. This study advances a flexible framework for researching the neural foundations of interpersonal sentiments and social relations that—conceptually, methodologically, and statistically—emphasizes group members’ neural interdependence.

scholarly journals Relative deprivation and intergroup competition

2010 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 685-700 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nir Halevy ◽  
Eileen Y. Chou ◽  
Taya R. Cohen ◽  
Gary Bornstein
Keyword(s):  
Relative Deprivation ◽  
Prisoner’S Dilemma ◽  
Group Level ◽  
Experimental Paradigm ◽  
Destructive Behavior ◽  
Intergroup Competition ◽  
Group Outcomes ◽  
Group Members ◽  
Collective Efficiency ◽  
Individual Participation

Two experiments utilized a new experimental paradigm—the Intergroup Prisoner’s Dilemma— Maximizing Difference (IPD-MD) game—to study how relative deprivation at the group level affects intergroup competition. The IPD-MD game enables group members to make a costly contribution to either a within-group pool that benefits fellow ingroup members, or a between-group pool, which, in addition, harms outgroup members. We found that when group members were put in a disadvantaged position, either by previous actions of the outgroup (Experiment 1) or by random misfortune (Experiment 2), they contributed substantially more to the competitive between-group pool. This destructive behavior both minimized inequality between the groups and reduced collective efficiency. Our results underscore the conditions that lead group members to care about relative (rather than absolute) group outcomes and highlight the need to differentiate between the motivation to get ahead and the motivation not to fall behind: the latter, it appears, is what motivates individual participation in destructive intergroup competition.

scholarly journals A family assessment based on the Social Relations Model

2010 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 259-279 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan De Mol ◽  
Ann Buysse ◽  
William L. Cook
Keyword(s):  
Social Relations ◽  
Family Assessment ◽  
Social Relations Model ◽  
The Social
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document