Social value orientation and group size uncertainty in public good dilemmas

Mill, Wladislaw; Theelen, Maik M. P.

doi:10.1016/j.socec.2019.05.001

Cited by 16 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 59 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…If based on existing statistical associations between one's own and others' choices, social projection can even be highly accurate (Krueger et al, 2012). In bargaining situations, for example, individuals can enlist their own response to an offer or allocation (i.e., “Would I accept or reject?”) to evaluate the risk of rejection without the need for extensive exploration (see, e.g., Mill & Theelen, 2019, for social projection in cooperation). In contrast, norm‐based expectations can reduce uncertainty even without social projection.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Not all uncertainty is treated equally: Information search under social and nonsocial uncertainty

Fleischhut

Artinger

Olschewski

et al. 2021

Behavioral Decision Making

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The social world is often portrayed as being less predictable and more uncertain than the nonsocial world. People may therefore feel the need to search more for information before making a choice. However, we suggest that cognitive tools such as social projection and norm‐based expectation may help people to predict others' behaviors in the social world and thus serve as a substitute for information search. We argue that in situations where the environment affords this possibility, social uncertainty may in fact trigger less search than nonsocial uncertainty. Consistent with our expectations, findings from two experiments showed that participants sampled considerably less and systematically differently in a mini‐ultimatum game (mUG; social uncertainty) than in structurally identical lotteries (nonsocial uncertainty). Even selfish individuals sensitive to the risk of rejection did not sample more than others, let alone as much as people in lotteries. Raising the stakes strongly increased sampling effort in lotteries but not in the social game. When evaluating risks based on outcomes alone, participants also anticipated searching less in mUGs than in lotteries, indicating that they were aware of norm‐based regularities in social worlds and that they exploited those regularities to guide their expectations. The findings highlight that the structure of social environments can enable decision makers to use cognitive tools to navigate uncertainty without needing to invest in extensive search.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Not all uncertainty is treated equally: Information search under social and nonsocial uncertainty

Fleischhut

Artinger

Olschewski

et al. 2021

Behavioral Decision Making

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the literature, SVO is often presented as an explanatory factor of the differences in cooperation in various social dilemmas. Many studies have shown that, overall, prosocials cooperate more than proselfs in social dilemmas (e.g., Allison & Messick, 1990;Anderson & Patterson, 2008;Atilgan & Markovsky, 2021;Balliet et al, 2009;De Cremer, 2000;Mill & Theelen, 2019;Pletzer et al, 2018;Simpson & Willer, 2015;Van Lange & Liebrand, 1989). A meta-analysis of 82 studies by Balliet et al (2009) showed a significant and small to medium effect size of SVO on cooperation in social dilemmas, confirming that, in general, SVO can be perceived as a significant predictor of cooperation.…”

Section: Social Value Orientation and Cooperationmentioning

confidence: 88%

The Role of Framing Effect and Social Value Orientation in Cooperation in Repeated Social Dilemmas

Pilárik

Grežo²,

Carrillo³

2022

Psykhe (Santiago)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The research in the area of framing effect has thoroughly addressed the question whether individuals cooperate more in negatively framed situations than in positively framed situations. However, so far, the studies brought inconsistent results. In the present study, it is hypothesized that the effect of framing on cooperative behavior depends on person's social value orientation. 79 Slovak university students (19 men, 60 women) divided into five small social groups were presented with a decomposed game to measure their social value orientation. Then, they cooperated in 9 repeated decisions within 2 different social dilemmas about the distribution of the financial resources. After each decision, either negatively or positively framed information was provided about how the groups' financial resources were affected. The results of the semi-robust two-way MANOVA showed that framing effect did not significantly affect cooperation, but social value orientation did. Importantly, social value orientation did not moderate the effect of framing on cooperation. The findings indicate the need for further examination of other possible factors, such as emotions, that may moderate or mediate the effect of framing on cooperation.

show abstract

“…First, more cooperation has been found in conditions where the group size is unknown than when the number of team members is certain because participants tend to underestimate the group size in uncertain conditions (Mill & Theelen, 2019).…”

Section: The Impacts Of Uncertainty On Prosocial Decision‐makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Navigating uncertainty in human social decision‐making: Consequences and coping strategies

Li,

et al. 2023

Social & Personality Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Uncertainty is a fundamental aspect of human social life.Based on fruitful findings, the current review aims to establish a schema that outlines the relationship between uncertainty and human social decision-making: the influences of uncertainty on social decision-making (mainly prosocial behaviors) and the strategies commonly employed to reduce social uncertainty. Human prosocial behaviors are modulated by both social and nonsocial uncertainty. Specifically, uncertainty decreases prosocial behaviors by providing moral wiggling room or promoting loss aversion but also helps maintain relationships by mitigating negative interactions. Moreover, impression formation, impression updating, and compliance with social norms are crucial strategies for coping with social uncertainty, but they are subject to various biases. Finally, we highlight some important issues that need to be addressed in future studies. In summary,

show abstract

Social value orientation and group size uncertainty in public good dilemmas

Cited by 16 publications

References 59 publications

Not all uncertainty is treated equally: Information search under social and nonsocial uncertainty

Not all uncertainty is treated equally: Information search under social and nonsocial uncertainty

The Role of Framing Effect and Social Value Orientation in Cooperation in Repeated Social Dilemmas

Navigating uncertainty in human social decision‐making: Consequences and coping strategies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About