The Development of an Intragroup Norm and the Effects of Interpersonal and Structural Challenges

Bettenhausen, Kenneth L.; Murnighan, J. Keith

doi:10.2307/2393428

Cited by 233 publications

(142 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

137

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…definitions (Bettenhausen and Murnighan 1991;Fehr and Gächter 2000;Bicchieri 2006). For example, Ostrom (2000) defines social norms as "shared understandings about actions that are obligatory, permitted, or forbidden" (pp.…”

Section: Defining and Identifying Social Normsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identifying Social Norms using Coordination Games: Why Does Dictator Game Sharing Vary?

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We introduce a method for identifying social norms, based on the property that they reflect collective perceptions regarding the appropriateness of behaviors. We demonstrate that the norms we elicit, along with a simple model combining concern for normcompliance with utility for money, predict changes in behavior across several variants of the dictator game. Our findings indicate that individuals care about monetary payoffs and the social appropriateness of any action taken. Further, we find that a social norm is best characterized as a profile of varying degrees of social appropriateness over the entire menu of actions available to a decision maker.

show abstract

Section: Defining and Identifying Social Normsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identifying Social Norms using Coordination Games: Why Does Dictator Game Sharing Vary?

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To a degree, processing objectives constitute the social reality that group members share for the intellectual tasks they confront (Bettenhausen & Murnighan, 1991;Festinger, 1950Festinger, , 1954Sherif, 1935). Unless the group members have a common or shared frame of reference for the processing objective, each may treat the information differently (Levine et ai., 1993;Paese, Bieser, & Tubbs, 1993;Tindale, Sheffey, & Scott, 1993).…”

Section: Processing Objectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The emerging conceptualization of groups as information processors.

Hinsz

Tindale²,

Vollrath³

1997

Psychological Bulletin

1,186

1,136

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A selective review of research highlights the emerging view of groups as information processors. In this review, the authors include research on processing objectives, attention, encoding, storage, retrieval, processing, response, feedback, and learning in small interacting task groups. The groups as information processors perspective underscores several characteristic dimensions of variability in group performance of cognitive tasks, namely, commonality-uniqueness of information, convergence-diversity of ideas, accentuation-attenuation of cognitive processes, and belongingnessdistinctiveness of members. A combination of contributions framework provides an additional conceptualization of information processing in groups. The authors also address implications, caveats, and questions for future research and theory regarding groups as information processors.In this information age, groups increasingly perform cognitive tasks (Galegher, Krant, & Egido, 1990;Salas, Dickinson, Converse, & Tannenbaum, 1992;Walsh & Ungson, 1991;Weick & Roberts, 1993 ). The nature of small-group research has changed correspondingly (see Bettenhausen, 199 l;Guzzo & Shea, 1992;Levine & Moreland, 1990; and Moreland, Hogg, & Halns, 1994, for reviews) to emphasize intellectual and cognitive tasks (e.g., Hinsz, 1990;Sniezek & Henry, 1989;Stasser, Taylor, & Hanna, 1989;Tindale, 1989;and Vollrath, Sheppard, Hinsz, & Davis, 1989). This change resembles a paradigm shift (Ktthn, 1970), albeit not as dramatic, perhaps because no one paradigm dominates small-group performance research (McGrath, 1993). The emerging view of groups as information processors extends methodological and theoretical developments in cognitive psychology to research in small-group performance. In this article, we selectively review relevant research to highlight how taskperforming groups process information. Rather than advocate that small-group research ought to examine groups as information processors, we document how research has already moved in that direction. To integrate our review, we identify several important dimensions of information processing in groups and

show abstract

“…Social norms may elicit different choices because (at least some) players make rule-based decisions (Bardsley, 2010;Bettenhausen & Murnighan, 1991;Bicchieri, 2006;Bicchieri & Xiao, 2009;Bicchieri & Zhang, 2012;Biel & Thøgersen, 2007;Borgstede, Dahlstrand, & Biel, 1999;Elster, 1989;Kallgren, Reno, & Cialdini, 2000;Young, 2003). In rule-based decision-making, a player first categorises the game as an exemplar of a class of social situations (e.g., this game resembles situations of class A) and then associates behavioural rules with that class of social situations (in situations of class A, do X).…”

Section: Social Norms Theoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Another frame, another game? Explaining framing effects in economic games

Gerlach¹,

Jaeger²

2016

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Small changes in the framing of games (i.e., the way in which the game situation is described to participants) can have large effects on players' choices. For example, referring to a prisoner's dilemma game as the "Community Game" as opposed to the "Wall Street Game" can double the cooperation rate (Liberman, Samuels, & Ross, 2004). Framing effects are an empirically well-studied phenomenon. However, a coherent theoretical explanation of the observed effects is still lacking. We distinguish between two types of framings - valence framing and context framing - and provide an overview of three general classes of theories that may account for the observed changes in behaviour.

show abstract

The Development of an Intragroup Norm and the Effects of Interpersonal and Structural Challenges

Cited by 233 publications

References 10 publications

Identifying Social Norms using Coordination Games: Why Does Dictator Game Sharing Vary?

Identifying Social Norms using Coordination Games: Why Does Dictator Game Sharing Vary?

The emerging conceptualization of groups as information processors.

Another frame, another game? Explaining framing effects in economic games

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About