Anna Gunnthorsdottir, Palmar Thorsteinsson, Sigurdur P. Olafsson
{"title":"Reciprocity or Community? Different Cultural Pathways to Cooperation and Welfare","authors":"Anna Gunnthorsdottir, Palmar Thorsteinsson, Sigurdur P. Olafsson","doi":"10.1177/10693971231166165","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We compare efficiency-enhancing cooperation and its underlying motives in Iceland and the US. The two countries are distinct along all measures of national culture known to us. They are however both developed democracies with similar GDP/capita (PPP adjusted). These similarities make it possible to hold constant aspects of culture related to wealth and institutions. In an experimental Voluntary Contribution Mechanism (VCM), we prime the participants with different social foci, emphasizing either their directly cooperating team or their wider social unit. With a team focus, cooperation levels do not differ between the two cultures, but this superficial similarity masks deep-seated differences: When the focus is on the wider social unit cooperation increases in Iceland and declines in the US. Both when the contribution levels are the same and when they differ, members of the two cultures differ in their motives to cooperate: Icelanders tend to cooperate unconditionally, and US subjects conditionally with a strong emphasis on reciprocity. Our findings indicate that different cultures can achieve similar economic and societal performance through different cultural norms and suggest that cooperation should be encouraged through culturally tailored persuasion tactics.","PeriodicalId":47154,"journal":{"name":"Cross-Cultural Research","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cross-Cultural Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10693971231166165","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
We compare efficiency-enhancing cooperation and its underlying motives in Iceland and the US. The two countries are distinct along all measures of national culture known to us. They are however both developed democracies with similar GDP/capita (PPP adjusted). These similarities make it possible to hold constant aspects of culture related to wealth and institutions. In an experimental Voluntary Contribution Mechanism (VCM), we prime the participants with different social foci, emphasizing either their directly cooperating team or their wider social unit. With a team focus, cooperation levels do not differ between the two cultures, but this superficial similarity masks deep-seated differences: When the focus is on the wider social unit cooperation increases in Iceland and declines in the US. Both when the contribution levels are the same and when they differ, members of the two cultures differ in their motives to cooperate: Icelanders tend to cooperate unconditionally, and US subjects conditionally with a strong emphasis on reciprocity. Our findings indicate that different cultures can achieve similar economic and societal performance through different cultural norms and suggest that cooperation should be encouraged through culturally tailored persuasion tactics.
期刊介绍:
Cross-Cultural Research, formerly Behavior Science Research, is sponsored by the Human Relations Area Files, Inc. (HRAF) and is the official journal of the Society for Cross-Cultural Research. The mission of the journal is to publish peer-reviewed articles describing cross-cultural or comparative studies in all the social/behavioral sciences and other sciences dealing with humans, including anthropology, sociology, psychology, political science, economics, human ecology, and evolutionary biology. Worldwide cross-cultural studies are particularly welcomed, but all kinds of systematic comparisons are acceptable so long as they deal explicity with cross-cultural issues pertaining to the constraints and variables of human behavior.