Cooperative Minorities and Intergroup Hostility

Rapoport,; Weiss, M.S.

doi:10.2307/20076301

Cited by 8 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…14 The payoff to the group potentially inflicting the hostility on the other group in the event of a non-cooperative outcome is assumed, for simplicity, to remain equal to 1 in all instances. This differs from the treatment in Rapoport and Weiss (2001), where this payoff is also affected by hostility in two opposing manners. On the one hand, the cooperation within the other group has lowered her utility, and hence sparked a reaction.…”

Section: The Modelmentioning

confidence: 82%

In-Group Cooperation in a Hostile Environment: An Economic Perspective on Some Aspects of Jewish Life in (Pre-Modern) Diaspora

Rapoport

Weiss

2002

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: The Modelmentioning

confidence: 82%

In-Group Cooperation in a Hostile Environment: An Economic Perspective on Some Aspects of Jewish Life in (Pre-Modern) Diaspora

Rapoport

Weiss

2002

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Consumers, anticipating this result, do not believe that the producer will produce the amount defined in (1). There exists, however, an equilibrium at which the amount consumers believe will be produced equals the amount the firm optimally produces.…”

Section: The Credibility Problem In Network Marketsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Credibility, Pre-Production and Inviting Competition in a Network Market

Etziony

Weiss

2003

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In this paper we considered a new solution to the credibility problem present in network industries. This problem arises because the value of a network good to its owner depends positively on the number of consumers who buy the good. Because of this property, it is in the interest of the producer to try to convince consumers that the market will be large, even if he knows it is untrue. Consumers, in turn, will disregard producer claims, and will, instead, try to reason out what size the market will attain. As a result, a lower than optimal quantity, both for consumers and producers, will be produced, i.e., the resulting equilibrium is Pareto inefficient. Katz and Shapiro (1985) and Economides (1996) suggest a solution to this problem in which the firm invites competitors to share their technology and enter the market, thus voluntarily giving up their monopoly position. We suggest an alternative remedy of pre-producing the good. This has the effect of changing the firm's cost structure in a manner that causes consumers to believe that the amount they will optimally sell (and hence the market size) will increase, again leading to higher profitability. The two strategies are compared, and we show the conditions under which each is preferable. We then consider combinations of these two strategies in two different manners. In the first the leader produces and then invites competitors who then also pre-produce, and in the second the leader pre-produces but the fringe firms do not; rather, they produce in the same period in which they sell. Surprisingly we found that the latter dominated the former, which led us to a better understanding about how and why each strategy works. In short, inviting competitors creates a positive externality that benefits all firms, while pre-producing helps only the firm doing the pre-producing and harms all other firms. Thus, the leader invites competitors so he can benefit from the positive externality, but he is better off if the competitors do not pre-produce.

show abstract

“…The effect of religious affiliation on CI is further likely to vary with the intensity of religious involvement, where more frequent religious practice may reinforce the effect of the religious affiliation due to higher exposition to religious preaching on values deemed important by that specific affiliation (termed 'priming' - Djupe and Calfano, 2013: 645), and with the affiliation's social standing (Guth, 2013). Followers of minority religions should be, with a view to group theory (Rapoport and Weiss, 2001), more supportive of CI than followers of majority religions due to higher expected feelings of cross-border solidarity. Considering the second axis of foreign-policy views, religious belief is theoretically associated with MI as well.…”

Section: Theoretical Effects Of Religion On CI and Mimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is particularly true of religions that encourage conversion, notably Christianity and Islam, and the effect might be enhanced by a higher intensity of religious involvement. The impact of religion on militant internationalist views is further likely to vary with the religious groups’ social standing (Rapoport and Weiss, 2001): followers of minority religions should be theoretically less supportive of MI than followers of majority ones, in view of their generally more vulnerable social status and greater sense of cross-border solidarity.…”

Section: The Effects Of Religion On Foreign-policy Viewsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Religion and foreign-policy views: Are religious people more altruistic and/or more militant?

Petríková

2018

International Political Science Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Religion shapes people’s identity and behaviour, and thus influences their foreign-policy views. Yet, existing research has thus far not explored this issue in depth or cross-nationally. This article contributes to filling this gap by examining the effects of religious belief, belonging, and behaviour on people’s foreign-policy views across a large sample of countries. Further, it investigates how these effects are influenced by religions’ social standing and countries’ income level. The study finds that religion significantly heightens followers’ militant internationalist views. Its effect on cooperative internationalist views is more ambiguous. Frequent religious attendance, self-identification as a religious person, and adherence to Islam tend to make people more altruistic in their foreign-policy views, while affiliation with Christianity and other religious faiths (Hinduism, Buddhism, etc.) may have the opposite effect. Overall, religion has a stronger effect on foreign-policy views among adherents to majority religions and in poorer countries.

show abstract

Cooperative Minorities and Intergroup Hostility

Cited by 8 publications

References 0 publications

In-Group Cooperation in a Hostile Environment: An Economic Perspective on Some Aspects of Jewish Life in (Pre-Modern) Diaspora

In-Group Cooperation in a Hostile Environment: An Economic Perspective on Some Aspects of Jewish Life in (Pre-Modern) Diaspora

Credibility, Pre-Production and Inviting Competition in a Network Market

Religion and foreign-policy views: Are religious people more altruistic and/or more militant?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About