scholarly journals Peer Effects in the Workplace: Evidence from Random Groupings in Professional Golf Tournaments

2009 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 34-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Guryan ◽  
Kory Kroft ◽  
Matthew J Notowidigdo

This paper uses random assignment in professional golf tournaments to test for peer effects in the workplace. We find no evidence that playing partners' ability affects performance, contrary to recent evidence on peer effects in the workplace from laboratory experiments, grocery scanners, and soft fruit pickers. In our preferred specification, we can rule out peer effects larger than 0.043 strokes for a one stroke increase in playing partners' ability. Our results complement existing studies on workplace peer effects and are useful in explaining how social effects vary across labor markets, across individuals, and with the form of incentives faced. (JEL D83, J44, L83)

2017 ◽  
Vol 107 (2) ◽  
pp. 425-456 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Cornelissen ◽  
Christian Dustmann ◽  
Uta Schönberg

Existing evidence on peer effects in the productivity of coworkers stems from either laboratory experiments or real-world studies referring to a specific firm or occupation. In this paper, we aim at providing more generalizable results by investigating a large local labor market, with a focus on peer effects in wages rather than productivity. Our estimation strategy—which links the average permanent productivity of workers' peers to their wages—circumvents the reflection problem and accounts for endogenous sorting of workers into peer groups and firms. On average over all occupations, and in the type of high-skilled occupations investigated in studies on knowledge spillover, we find only small peer effects in wages. In the type of low-skilled occupations analyzed in extant studies on social pressure, in contrast, we find larger peer effects, about one-half the size of those identified in similar studies on productivity. (JEL J24, J31, J41, M12, M54)


2021 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernd Frick ◽  
Katharina Moser

Do women shy away from competition while men compete too much? The available, mostly experimental evidence generally supports these assumptions. However, in contrast to laboratory settings, labor markets do not have random assignment of workers. Instead, individuals—professional athletes and corporate executives—self-select into specific occupations. Using data from Alpine and Nordic skiing over 52 and 37 years respectively, we show that career length of men and women is virtually identical. Thus, when adequately controlling for self-selection into a highly competitive environment, differences between men and women with respect to competitiveness completely disappear.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lukas Kiessling ◽  
Jonas Radbruch ◽  
Sebastian Schaube

This paper studies how the presence of peers and different peer assignment rules—self-selection versus random assignment—affect individual performance. Using a framed field experiment, we find that the presence of a randomly assigned peer improves performance by 28% of a standard deviation (SD), whereas self-selecting peers induces an additional 15%–18% SD improvement in performance. Our results document peer effects in multiple characteristics and show that self-selection changes these characteristics. However, a decomposition reveals that variations in the peer composition contribute only little to the performance differences across peer assignment rules. Rather, we find that self-selection has a direct effect on performance. This paper was accepted by Yan Chen, decision analysis.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Petr Houdek ◽  
Štěpán Bahník ◽  
Marek Hudik ◽  
Marek Albert Vranka

Many experimental studies use random assignment to identify factors influencing dishonesty. However, in real-life, people deliberately choose dishonesty-enabling environments. In two laboratory experiments, we let participants self-select in two tasks, one of which enabled them to cheat. We found that participants low in the honesty-humility were more likely to choose the cheating-enabling task. Furthermore, after choosing it, they cheated even more than when they were randomly assigned to it for the first time. When choosing the cheating-enabling task was costly, the interest in it decreased, but those who chose the task anyway cheated even more. An intervention based on social proof aimed to discourage self-selection into the cheating-enabling environment had the opposite effect. The results suggest that immoral individuals are likely to dominate cheating-enabling environments, where they cheat extensively. Interventions trying to limit the choice of these environments may backfire and lead to the selection of the worst fraudsters.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Paul Reddish

<p>The universality and antiquity of music and dance suggest that they may serve some important adaptive function. Why are music and dance cultural universals? One popular theory is that music and dance function to enhance mutually benefiting cooperation. While the cooperation hypothesis finds support from anthropological observations and recent experiments, the proximate mechanisms remain unclear. In this thesis, I examine if being in synchrony is a critical factor underlying music and dance’s cooperative effects. I define synchrony as rhythmically moving or vocalising in time with others. In support of synchrony’s role in fostering cooperation, a number of studies exploring two person interactions have found positive social effects from synchrony. However, it is not clear whether synchrony enhances cooperation in groups larger than two as typical with music and dance. This thesis describes five laboratory experiments that were conducted to investigate: (1) whether group synchrony increases cooperation; and (2) which psychological mechanisms are involved in producing synchrony’s cooperative effects. In the first three experiments, small groups of participants were asked to perform body movements or to vocalise words in time with the same (synchrony condition) or different (asynchrony condition) metronome beats. Cooperative behaviour was measured with a helping scenario and an economic game. A small increase in cooperation was found with synchronous movement compared to asynchronous movement (experiment 1 and 3). However, this difference was only significant with the economic game measure (experiment 3). When vocalisation was isolated (experiment 2), contrary to expectations, the highest level of helping occurred after the asynchrony vocal condition. A plausible explanation for such small and inconsistent effects comes from the method in which synchrony was manipulated. Following previous methodologies, the goal for participants was to entrain to their own beat. Yet in natural human ecologies, synchrony is a product of shared intentionality – the sharing of psychological states to produce collaborative behaviour. To better understand the contribution of shared intentionality, experiments 4 and 5 varied synchrony with shared intentionality, and then measured cooperation. These experiments revealed that when participants worked together to create synchrony, substantial increases in cooperation were found, for both synchronous vocalisations (experiment 4) and for synchronous movements (experiment 5). Synchrony was also found to significantly amplify two key hypothesised mediating variables: perceived similarity and entitativity (the degree to which a collection of people are perceived as a group). Path analysis supported a proposed mechanism by which synchrony combines with shared intentionality to produce greater cooperation through: (1) increased attention to the behaviours of other participants; and (2) reinforcement of successful cooperation. This thesis, therefore, extends previous research on group music and dance in three ways. First, the combined effect of synchrony and shared intentionality is identified as critical to the cooperation enhancing effects of music and dance. Second, it describes plausible mechanisms for how synchrony may lead to increased cooperation. Third, it provides empirical evidence in support of these mechanisms.</p>


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document