180 likes | 335 Views
Ingroup Cooperation and Trust: Two Models. Marilynn B. Brewer Ohio State University Sapporo, Japan September, 2003. Brewer & Kramer (1986). Effects of collective identity salience on cooperation in a resource dilemma: An anomaly. Resource Dilemma (Brewer & Kramer, 1986). S1. S5. S2.
E N D
Ingroup Cooperation and Trust: Two Models Marilynn B. Brewer Ohio State University Sapporo, Japan September, 2003
Brewer & Kramer (1986) Effects of collective identity salience on cooperation in a resource dilemma: An anomaly
Resource Dilemma(Brewer & Kramer, 1986) S1 S5 S2 S6 Resource Pool S7 S3 S4 S8 “Replenishment” rate = 0.9 – 1.1
Resource Dilemma(Brewer & Kramer, 1986) S19 S10 S9 S1 S5 S14 S16 S2 S6 Resource Pool S20 S7 S3 S17 S15 S4 S8 S13 S11 S12
Experimental Design • Group Size: 8 vs 32 • Framing: Conservation dilemma vs Contribution dilemma (public goods) • Identity salience: individual vs collective • Time (feedback) Phase 1: gradual depletion (14 trials) Phase 2: depletion crisis (6 trials)
Results: Phase 1 First trial: Main effect of group size (Msmall= 13.15 vs Mlarge = 14.42) Main effect of framing(Mcons = 12.13 vs Mcont = 15.45) Across trial blocks: Slight decline in take, especially in public goods (contribution) condition
Results: Phase 2 Contribution Frame Conservation Frame
Two Models of Social Control • Reciprocal exchange relationships interpersonal trust; internal differentiation • Group-based collectivismdepersonalized loyalty to group as a whole; entification and boundedness
A Nonintuitive Implication Individualism Collectivism
Some Evidence… • Americans score high on individualism but also on ingroup identification, value of belonging to groups (Oyserman et al., 2002; Yuki, 2003) • Gender differences in relational versus collective interdependence (Kashima et al., 1995; Gabriel & Gardner, 1999)
Social Value Orientation and the Ingroup Effect in Social Dilemmas(DeCremer & vanVugt, 1999) Ingroup Salience