Psychological mechanisms underlying ingroup favouritism in cooperation: Revisiting the reputation management and expectation hypotheses

IF 4 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Group Processes & Intergroup Relations Pub Date : 2024-04-12 DOI:10.1177/13684302241239860
Hirotaka Imada, Nobuhiro Mifune, Hiroshi Shimizu
{"title":"Psychological mechanisms underlying ingroup favouritism in cooperation: Revisiting the reputation management and expectation hypotheses","authors":"Hirotaka Imada, Nobuhiro Mifune, Hiroshi Shimizu","doi":"10.1177/13684302241239860","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"According to the theory of bounded generalized reciprocity (BGR), intergroup contexts afford individuals the assumption that indirect reciprocity is bounded by group membership, and this shapes ingroup favouritism in cooperation. The assumption of bounded indirect reciprocity is hypothesized to result in ingroup favouritisms via two pathways: it leads people to behave in ways that earn and maintain a positive reputation in the eyes of ingroup, but not outgroup, members (the reputation management hypothesis), and it leads individuals to expect other ingroup members to be more cooperative than outgroup members (the expectation hypothesis). In other words, BGR offers two parallel psychological explanations for why people display ingroup favouritism. While the latter hypothesis has gained much experimental support, evidence for the former is rather scarce. Here, we report a direct test of both the reputation management hypothesis and the expectation hypothesis using two economic games. Overall, we found support for the expectation hypothesis, but not for the reputation management hypothesis.","PeriodicalId":48099,"journal":{"name":"Group Processes & Intergroup Relations","volume":"93 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Group Processes & Intergroup Relations","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302241239860","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

According to the theory of bounded generalized reciprocity (BGR), intergroup contexts afford individuals the assumption that indirect reciprocity is bounded by group membership, and this shapes ingroup favouritism in cooperation. The assumption of bounded indirect reciprocity is hypothesized to result in ingroup favouritisms via two pathways: it leads people to behave in ways that earn and maintain a positive reputation in the eyes of ingroup, but not outgroup, members (the reputation management hypothesis), and it leads individuals to expect other ingroup members to be more cooperative than outgroup members (the expectation hypothesis). In other words, BGR offers two parallel psychological explanations for why people display ingroup favouritism. While the latter hypothesis has gained much experimental support, evidence for the former is rather scarce. Here, we report a direct test of both the reputation management hypothesis and the expectation hypothesis using two economic games. Overall, we found support for the expectation hypothesis, but not for the reputation management hypothesis.
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
合作中群体偏爱的心理机制:重新审视声誉管理和期望假说
根据有界广义互惠理论(BGR),群体间环境为个人提供了一种假设,即间接互惠受群体成员身份的约束,这就形成了合作中的群体偏袒。有界间接互惠的假设被认为会通过两种途径导致群体内偏袒行为:一是导致人们的行为方式能够在群体内成员(而非群体外成员)的眼中赢得并保持积极的声誉(声誉管理假设);二是导致个体期望其他群体内成员比群体外成员更善于合作(期望假设)。换句话说,"声誉管理假说 "提供了两种平行的心理学解释,说明人们为什么会表现出内向偏好。后一种假说得到了许多实验支持,而前一种假说的证据却相当匮乏。在此,我们利用两个经济游戏对声誉管理假说和期望假说进行了直接测试。总体而言,我们发现期望假说得到了支持,而声誉管理假说却没有得到支持。
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
8.50
自引率
4.50%
发文量
76
期刊介绍: Group Processes & Intergroup Relations is a scientific social psychology journal dedicated to research on social psychological processes within and between groups. It provides a forum for and is aimed at researchers and students in social psychology and related disciples (e.g., organizational and management sciences, political science, sociology, language and communication, cross cultural psychology, international relations) that have a scientific interest in the social psychology of human groups. The journal has an extensive editorial team that includes many if not most of the leading scholars in social psychology of group processes and intergroup relations from around the world.
期刊最新文献
Judgments toward displays of national (dis)loyalty in members of nations other than one’s own: Universalistic and parochial perspectives Two Paths to Violence: Individual versus Group Emotions during Conflict Escalation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories “Ins and outs”: Ethnic identity, the need to belong, and responses to inclusion and exclusion in inclusive common ingroups Divergent views of party positions: How ideology and own issue position shape party perception through convergence and divergence processes Corrigendum to “Tackling loneliness together: A three-tier social identity framework for social prescribing”
×
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