Revisiting the bounded generalized reciprocity model: Ingroup favoritism and concerns about negative evaluation

IF 3.2 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Journal of Experimental Social Psychology Pub Date : 2024-04-15 DOI:10.1016/j.jesp.2024.104618
Yutaka Horita, Shun Hamada
{"title":"Revisiting the bounded generalized reciprocity model: Ingroup favoritism and concerns about negative evaluation","authors":"Yutaka Horita,&nbsp;Shun Hamada","doi":"10.1016/j.jesp.2024.104618","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The bounded generalized reciprocity (BGR) model, grounded in reputation management, predicts that the motivation underlying ingroup favoritism (favoring one's own group over other groups) is driven by avoiding a negative reputation within one's own group. This research conducted two economic games with minimal groups in which reputational concerns (partners' knowledge of participants' group membership) were manipulated. We aimed to verify the replicability of the experimental results in support of the BGR model. A study (<em>N</em> = 394) using a dictator game (in which participants unilaterally determined their partners' payoffs) indicated the following: (1) participants were more likely to behave cooperatively with ingroup partners than with outgroup partners, regardless of whether their partners knew the participants' group membership; and (2) individual differences in fear of negative evaluation by others were not associated with cooperation toward the ingroup. Similar results were found in another study (<em>N</em> = 429) using a prisoner's dilemma game (in which participants' payoffs were determined by their partners). However, while sharing knowledge about group membership facilitated cooperation with the outgroup in the dictator game, no such tendency was observed in the prisoner's dilemma game. These findings suggest that concerns about a bad reputation may not play a relatively important role in ingroup favoritism, and that generosity toward outgroup members is influenced by the presence or absence of interdependence (i.e., whether the partner's behavior affects the participant's payoffs). This research proposes a reconsideration of the motivations behind cooperation within or between groups.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48441,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Social Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Social Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022103124000301","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The bounded generalized reciprocity (BGR) model, grounded in reputation management, predicts that the motivation underlying ingroup favoritism (favoring one's own group over other groups) is driven by avoiding a negative reputation within one's own group. This research conducted two economic games with minimal groups in which reputational concerns (partners' knowledge of participants' group membership) were manipulated. We aimed to verify the replicability of the experimental results in support of the BGR model. A study (N = 394) using a dictator game (in which participants unilaterally determined their partners' payoffs) indicated the following: (1) participants were more likely to behave cooperatively with ingroup partners than with outgroup partners, regardless of whether their partners knew the participants' group membership; and (2) individual differences in fear of negative evaluation by others were not associated with cooperation toward the ingroup. Similar results were found in another study (N = 429) using a prisoner's dilemma game (in which participants' payoffs were determined by their partners). However, while sharing knowledge about group membership facilitated cooperation with the outgroup in the dictator game, no such tendency was observed in the prisoner's dilemma game. These findings suggest that concerns about a bad reputation may not play a relatively important role in ingroup favoritism, and that generosity toward outgroup members is influenced by the presence or absence of interdependence (i.e., whether the partner's behavior affects the participant's payoffs). This research proposes a reconsideration of the motivations behind cooperation within or between groups.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
重新审视有界广义互惠模型:同类偏爱和对负面评价的担忧
以声誉管理为基础的有界广义互惠(BGR)模型预测,内群体偏爱(偏爱本群体而非其他群体)的动机是为了避免在本群体中获得负面声誉。本研究进行了两个最小群体的经济博弈,其中对声誉问题(合作伙伴对参与者群体成员身份的了解)进行了操纵。我们旨在验证实验结果的可复制性,以支持 BGR 模型。一项使用独裁者游戏(参与者单方面决定其伙伴的报酬)进行的研究(N = 394)显示了以下结果:(1) 无论参与者的伙伴是否知道参与者的群体成员身份,参与者与内群体伙伴合作的可能性都高于与外群体伙伴合作的可能性;(2) 害怕他人负面评价的个体差异与对内群体的合作无关。另一项使用囚徒困境游戏(参与者的报酬由其伙伴决定)进行的研究(N = 429)也发现了类似的结果。然而,在独裁者游戏中,分享关于群体成员的知识有利于与外群体合作,而在囚徒困境游戏中却没有观察到这种趋势。这些研究结果表明,对坏名声的担忧可能不会在内向群体偏袒中起到相对重要的作用,而对外向群体成员的慷慨则会受到是否存在相互依赖关系(即伙伴的行为是否会影响参与者的回报)的影响。这项研究建议重新考虑群体内部或群体之间合作的动机。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
2.90%
发文量
134
期刊介绍: The Journal of Experimental Social Psychology publishes original research and theory on human social behavior and related phenomena. The journal emphasizes empirical, conceptually based research that advances an understanding of important social psychological processes. The journal also publishes literature reviews, theoretical analyses, and methodological comments.
期刊最新文献
Brilliance as gender deviance: Gender-role incongruity as another barrier to women's success in academic fields The impact of social identity complexity on intergroup parochial and universal cooperation under different payoff structures and frames Bless her heart: Gossip phrased with concern provides advantages in female intrasexual competition Editorial Board Revisiting the moral forecasting error – A preregistered replication and extension of “Are we more moral than we think?”
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1