The Effect of Group Decision Making on Cooperation in Social Dilemmas

Abstract

A robust finding in social dilemma research is an increase in individual cooperative choice following group discussion about the dilemma. To elaborate the idea that this effect arises from the development of within-group consensus, groups of six made explicit group decisions about their subsequent individual choice. Perceived demonstrability of cooperativeness in the dilemma was manipulated through changes both to instructions and the incentives of the dilemma. As demonstrability decreased, so did the proportion of groups deciding to cooperate, leading to a reduction in the group discussion effect. Social decision scheme analysis supported the demonstrability-group decision hypothesis. The interaction between demonstrability, individual opinions and group process is proposed to explain the group discussion effect

Group transformation: How demonstrability promotes intra-group cooperation in social dilemmas

“…It follows that increasing the demonstrability of the solution to a social dilemma should make it easier for a group to determine the optimality of every group member choosing to cooperate. Consistent with this idea, Hopthrow and Hulbert (2005) demonstrated that, in groups comprised of a mixture of co-operators and non-cooperators higher demonstrability led to more cooperative decisions and these in turn led to more subsequent cooperative decisions by individual group members.…”

“…In line with this contention, Hopthrow and Hulbert (2005) found that prior to group interaction the same proportion of individuals indicated a preference for a non-cooperative choice when considering a high or low demonstrability dilemma. Demonstrability only had an effect once they considered the dilemma in a group.…”

“…It could also be that exposure to cooperative individuals highlights the social desirability of cooperativeness. Furthermore, Hopthrow and Hulbert (2005) found that once a collective decision has been made to cooperate this promotes higher cooperation in subsequent decisions by group members.…”

“…size of losses or benefits). The present study uses the dilemma matrices from Hopthrow and Hulbert (2005). In these the ratio between fear and greed remains constant, and hence the so called K' value (Komorita, 1976) remains the same in each dilemma at 0.346.…”

Understanding the Mechanisms of Collective Decision Making in Ecological Restoration: An Agent-Based Model of Actors and Organizations

“…In collective decision-making processes, group discussion and even dissent fosters new ideas, truthfulness, and solidarity (Dryzek and List 2003, Hopthrow and Hulbert 2005, Argyres and Mui 2007, Mulford et al 2008, Landier et al 2009). Sometimes, however, individuals can be willfully and strongly tied to their own position, thus becoming entrenched (Anderson et al 1980, Anderson and Lindsay 1998, Meyer et al 2000, Locke et al 2008, Dane 2010 Dissenters must decide to either conform or remain entrenched in their view.…”