Yes, I'll Do it: A Large-Scale Experiment on the Volunteer's Dilemma

Abstract

In many real-life situations people face a simple decision whether to volunteer or not to provide some benefit for themselves and also for others. This research investigates the effects of the group size and the magnitude of the volunteering cost in a controlled large-scale laboratory experiment, where subjects play the volunteer's dilemma only once. The experiment varies group sizes ranging from groups of 3 to about 100, and 2 different cost/benefit ratios. Results show that high cost reduces volunteering probability only in the smallest groups, but not for other group sizes. Furthermore, non-monotonic group size effect is found on the individual volunteering decisions. These findings are not in line with the mixed-strategy Nash equilibrium prediction. Subjects volunteer more often in most treatments than the Nash prediction which benefits them on average compared to the Nash prediction.

The volunteer’s dilemma explains the bystander effect

“…Goeree et al (2017) corroborate these results and show that such behavior, which leads large groups to be more likely to produce the public good than smaller groups, is in line with the predictions of the quantal-response equilibrium (McKelvey and Palfrey 1995). More recently, Kopányi-Peuker (2019) and Hillenbrand et al (2020) have tested the volunteer's dilemma with groups of up to 300 subjects. In conflict with the model, both papers find that subjects' behavior is insensitive to group size for such very large groups.…”

“…In this case, players' strategic interactions in the volunteer's dilemma-in which players are less likely to volunteer in larger groups-could explain the bystander effect observed in the field-in which bystanders are less likely to help in larger groups. While the strategic interactions predicted by the volunteer's dilemma are typically used to describe why people in larger groups are less likely to provide help (Archetti 2011;Bergstrom 2012Bergstrom , 2017Bliss and Nalebuff 1984;Campos-Mercade 2020;Diekmann 1985Diekmann , 1986Diekmann , 1993Franzen 2013;Fromell et al 2019;Guha 2020;Harrington 2001;Healy and Pate 2018;Hillenbrand and Winter 2018;Hillenbrand et al 2020;Kopányi-Peuker 2019;Tutic 2014;Przepiorka and Diekmann 2018;Weesie 1993Weesie , 1994, the connection between the volunteer's dilemma and the bystander effect lacks empirical evidence. 1 In this paper, I test the strategic interactions predicted by the volunteer's dilemma as an explanation for the bystander effect.…”

Volunteering at the Workplace under Incomplete Information: Teamsize Does Not Matter

“…First, companies and the teams within the company may be of various sizes, which in turn has an influence on the degree of volunteering. This has been robustly shown in various lab and field experiments on the topic (Diekmann 1986, Franzen 1995, Goeree et al 2017, Kopányi-Peuker 2019, Latané and Nida 1981, Przepiorka and Berger 2016, Barron and Yechiam 2002. Second, the individual costs of volunteering might be different for different workers, which also affects individual volunteering choices.…”

“…With its numerous variations, it has been examined in several experimental studies, and the main predictions, in particular the diffusion of responsibility effect, has been shown to be fairly robust (Diekmann 1986, Franzen 1995, Goeree et al 2017, Kopányi-Peuker 2019. Also, in different field environments, the predictions from the Volunteer's Dilemma turn out to be robust (Latané and Nida 1981, Przepiorka and Berger 2016, Barron and Yechiam 2002.…”