when it comes to social dilemmas, the most beneficial course of action for an individual will

Social dilemmas such as the commons dilemma are arranged in a way that make it easy to be selfish because the personally beneficial choice (such as using water during a water shortage or driving to work alone in one’s own car) produces benefits for the individual, no matter what others do.

Full Answer

What is the most beneficial approach in social dilemmas?

Taken together, these games suggest that the most beneficial approach in social dilemmas is to maintain a balance between self-concern and other-concern.

How do individual differences in cooperation and competition affect social dilemmas?

Individual differences in cooperation and competition, such as those proposed by the dual-concern model, show that individuals will relate to social dilemmas depending on their underlying personal orientations. Although women do compete less than men in some situations, they compete about as much as men do in other situations.

What is the contribution dilemma in psychology?

Another type of social dilemma—the contributions dilemma —occurs when the short-term costs of a behavior lead individuals to avoid performing it, and this may prevent the long-term benefits that would have occurred if the behaviors had been performed.

How do social dilemmas make it easy to be selfish?

Social dilemmas such as the commons dilemma are arranged in a way that make it easy to be selfish because the personally beneficial choice (such as using water during a water shortage or driving to work alone in one’s own car) produces benefits for the individual, no matter what others do.

What characterizes a social dilemma?

Social dilemmas are characterized by two properties: (a) the social payoff. to each individual for defecting behavior is higher than the payoff for. cooperative behavior, regardless of what the other society members do, yet. (b) all individuals in the society receive a lower payoff if all defect than if. all cooperate.

Which of the following individuals is most likely to engage in social loafing group of answer choices?

According to Kamau and Williams (1993), college students were the population most likely to engage in social loafing. Their study also found that women and participants from collectivistic cultures were less likely to engage in social loafing, explaining that their group orientation may account for this.

When members of a group give priority to the cohesiveness of the group over the facts of a situation they are engaging in what social psychologists Cal?

16. When members of a group give priority to the cohesiveness of the group over the facts of a situation, they are engaging in what social psychologists call _____. Correct. When members of a group give priority to the cohesiveness of the group over the facts of a situation, they are engaging in groupthink.

What do Deindividuation and social loafing have in common?

What do deindividuation and social loafing have in common? In both, individuals' actions are not identifiable.

What is social loafing how can it be overcome?

Social loafing can be limited by establishing individual accountability, minimizing free riding, encouraging team loyalty, and by assigning distinct responsibilities for each team member.

How do you manage social loafing?

One of the key strategies to reduce the potential for social loafing is to create smaller groups or teams. Make it easier for team member's work to be seen and supported. Smaller groups also enable individuals to form relationships and build a cohesive unit – all attributes that encourage individuals to contribute.

What is groupthink theory?

Groupthink is a phenomenon that occurs when the desire for group consensus overrides people's common sense desire to present alternatives, critique a position, or express an unpopular opinion. Here, the desire for group cohesion effectively drives out good decision-making and problem solving.

When people believe they have control over events in their lives they are said to have an external locus of control?

Locus of control is the degree to which people believe that they, as opposed to external forces (beyond their influence), have control over the outcome of events in their lives. The concept was developed by Julian B. Rotter in 1954, and has since become an aspect of personality psychology.

What are 4 characteristics of groupthink?

Characteristics of Groupthink Rationalization of decisions to minimize objections. Belief in the absolute goodness of the group. Intense dislike of outsiders – stereotyped and misleading portrayals of outside members and those who have left the group.

What implications does groupthink have for social welfare and social change?

Impact of Groupthink Groupthink can cause people to ignore important information and can ultimately lead to poor decisions. This can be damaging even in minor situations but can have much more dire consequences in certain settings.

What does deindividuation mean in psychology?

deindividuation, phenomenon in which people engage in seemingly impulsive, deviant, and sometimes violent acts in situations in which they believe they cannot be personally identified (e.g., in groups and crowds and on the Internet).

Under what conditions will groups tend to make better decisions than individuals?

Conditions under which groups make better decisions than individuals: - when group members freely contribute independent opinions from a variety of view points (constructive different perspectives).

What is social dilemma?

Broadly defined, social dilemmas involve a conflict between immediate self-interest and longer-term collective interests. These are challenging situations because acting in one’s immediate self-interest is tempting to everyone involved, even though everybody benefits from acting in the longer-term collective interest.

What are the factors that influence cooperation in social dilemmas?

Our review is organized around calls in the literature for the development of theory, more interdisciplinary and applied research, and three broad categories of factors that influence cooperation in social dilemmas (structural, psychological, and dynamic influences ). Our review focuses largely on developments in the social psychological literature, though we also address growing literatures in a number of related fields of study. Moreover, in light of space, our goal is not to exhaustively catalogue the many factors that drive choice behavior in social dilemmas, but rather, to highlight several important and exciting developments in the field. Ultimately, our goal is to use this discussion of recent developments as a bridge between classic research on social dilemmas and future directions with the potential to contribute new insights to this important and growing field. In particular, we will discuss broad developments in (a) theoretical frameworks in psychology, (b) interdisciplinary approaches to social dilemmas, and (c) ecological validity, or trends from “games to real life.”

How does payoff affect cooperation?

the value of consuming the good). In terms of the situation, another factor that has a large impact on the actual (or anticipated) payoffs in a social dilemma is the presence of rewards for cooperation and punishment for non-cooperation. Indeed, a recent meta-analysis showed that rewards and punishments both have moderate positive effects on cooperation in social dilemmas ( Balliet et al., 2011a, Balliet et al., 2011b, Balliet et al., 2011c ). Administering rewards and punishments is costly, however, and may thereby create a “second order public good.” For example, sanctions may be good for the collective, but individuals may decide not to contribute money or effort for this purpose. In his classic work, Yamagishi, 1986a, Yamagishi, 1986b, Yamagishi, 1988b showed that people are willing to make such contributions if they share the goal of cooperation, but do not trust others to voluntarily cooperate. More recently, Fehr and Gächter (2000) showed that people are also often willing to engage in costly punishment, and may even prefer institutions that provide the possibility of such sanctions, perhaps in part because the possibility of costly punishment can help to install a norm of cooperation ( Gürerk, Irlenbusch, & Rockenbach, 2006 ).

How does mood affect decision making?

The influence of affect on decision-making is another topic of current prominence within the field of social dilemmas. Here, research has focused on both general mood states and specific emotions. Regarding mood, a clear pattern that emerges is that a positive mood is not necessarily beneficial for encouraging cooperation. For example, a positive mood can lead people to infer that they have been sufficiently supportive of the group and they are now at liberty to choose however they wish (e.g., Hertel & Fiedler, 1994 ). It may also be that a positive mood leads people to focus more on internal states, which would heighten selfishness, while negative moods lead to an external focus, which would heighten cooperation ( Tan & Forgas, 2010 ). These findings are consistent with the emerging notion that happiness is not always a useful mood state to induce ( Gruber, Mauss, & Tamir, 2011) and raises the interesting notion that it could be beneficial to make social dilemma participants feel bad in some way about the situation. Along these lines, it has been shown that those who feel badly about their choices in a social dilemma will become more cooperative in subsequent dilemmas, even if there is a considerable time lag between the initial and subsequent dilemmas ( Ketelaar & Au, 2003 ).

How do structural influences affect social dilemmas?

In summary, structural influences center on key differences in the interdependence structure of the social dilemma, such that outcomes linked to cooperation can be improved through reward and outcomes linked to non-cooperation through punishment, with exclusion representing a strong form of punishment. The effects of structural differences often go beyond material outcomes, and elicit a rich psychology involving neuroscientific, cognitive and emotional processes. Asymmetries and roles are important determinants of behavior in social dilemma, yet understudied, especially when looking at social dilemmas in everyday life where asymmetries and roles seem the rule and not the exception. Uncertainty and noise are also omnipresent in everyday life, and they may shape the psychology in many ways, in that they may challenge trust, feelings of control, and perhaps sometimes give rise to judgments and heuristics that are predictably inaccurate, such as unrealistic optimism regarding the state of affairs (such as size of the pool) or unrealistic pessimism regarding other’s willingness to cooperate.

Why is evolution important?

To illustrate, interdependence theory (and game theory) suggests the importance of incomplete information. In social dilemmas defined by a conflict of self-interest and collective interest, incomplete information begs trust: did the other intentionally help (or harm) the collective interest? Evolutionary, this is important because it challenges the ways in which cooperation may be evolved: for example, it may help us understand why giving strangers the benefit of doubt has functional (and survival) value. Even more, it may help us understand the roots of generosity ( Nowak & Sigmund, 1992 ). Proximally, giving others the benefit of doubt, especially when accompanied by the communication of generosity, will enhance trust the other has in your intentions – which in turn is crucial for coping with uncertainty and incomplete information ( Van Lange et al., 2002 ). We are truly looking forward to a fruitful and comprehensive integration of adaption to structure (the game we play), the psychological and interpersonal processes involved (what we make of the game), and the ultimate functions it serves in terms of psychological, economic, and evolutionary outcomes.

What are some examples of social traps?

Examples of delayed social traps include the buildup of pollution due to overreliance on cars, and the eventual collapse of a common fishing ground as a result of sustained overharvesting. Given their emphasis on “consuming” or “taking” a positive outcome for the self, social traps are often called take some dilemmas, a classic example of which is the commons (or resource) dilemma.

What are the characteristics of a prisoner's dilemma?

For one, the prisoner’s dilemma is arranged such that a positive outcome for one player does not necessarily mean a negative outcome for the other player (i.e., the prisoner’s dilemma is not a fixed-sum situation but an integrative one). If you consider again the matrix in Figure 13.2 "The Prisoner’s Dilemma", you can see that if one player takes the cooperative choice (to not confess) and the other takes the competitive choice (to confess), then the prisoner who cooperates loses, whereas the other prisoner wins. However, if both prisoners make the cooperative choice, each remaining quiet, then neither gains more than the other, and both prisoners receive a relatively light sentence. In this sense, both players can win at the same time.

How is the prisoner's dilemma played?

In many cases, the prisoner’s dilemma game is played over a series of trials, in which players can modify their responses based on those given by their partners on previous trials. For example, the arms race between the Soviet Union and the United States during the Cold War can be seen as a social dilemma that occurs over time. Over a period of years, each country chooses whether to compete (by building nuclear weapons) or to cooperate (by not building nuclear weapons). And in each case, both countries feel that it is in their best interest to compete rather than cooperate.

How do social dilemmas help us?

In conclusion social dilemmas provide deeper understanding of human nature and behavior. Through social dilemmas and through the problems that arise with them, humanity learns how to deal with difficult situations and what to expect from people in certain situations, such as when the goods are scarce. In order to solve social dilemmas it is important to consider all the above mentioned factors. The emphasis is on moving from laboratory testing to real life, to look at psychological, structural and strategic solutions all together; to realize that in dilemmas such as overpopulation, rules, groups and understanding how people think play a crucial role without which positive outcomes would not be possible. Both structural and psychological features are important in solving social dilemma of overpopulation. It is not enough to just apply rules and threat as well as it is not enough to just try to educate people, these features have to be combine in order to get close to solving the overpopulation dilemma. Overpopulation is a social dilemma because in theory it is easier to plan how it should be solved, however in real life it is much more difficult if not impossible.

What are some examples of social dilemmas?

Examples of social dilemmas that are quite often mentioned in the media are global warming, water shortage, food shortage and overpopulation. In this essay the main concentration is on overpopulation with factors such as food shortage and water shortage having a great influence on the development of this social dilemma.

How do groups influence social dilemmas?

Another powerful predictor is group formation and situation. The way certain groups are run can influence how people behave in a social dilemma. When people feel like they are part of a group and that they are appreciated or have a certain function in within the group, they tend to contribute more towards positive outcomes of their group and consume less from common resources that are scarce (Van Vugt & De-Cremer, 1999, Kramer & Brewer, 1984). The problem is that when social dilemmas involve two or more groups, the likelihood of cooperation is weak (Kerr, 1999). In situations where there are too many groups, electing a leader for each group is of benefit. These leaders would form a group on its own where co-operation and communication is important. These leaders are assigned to control the goods and to effectively communicate within the groups that they are leaders of as well as communicate with the group of the leader that they are part of. While there are plenty of goods, the leaders tend to be voted democratically, however when the resources are scarce, leaders with tough rules tend to be voted for (De-Cremer & Van Vugt 1999). Therefore in the overpopulation dilemma the problem is in how to manage the groups. The importance in managing a high number of groups is in communication and building trust (Osrom 1990). Constant communication within the group and in between the groups reinforces group identity. People are more likely to cooperate if they don’t feel excluded from decision making.

What is the commons dilemma game?

The Commons Dilemma Game is where a group of herdsmen are using common land for their cows. Every herdsmen benefits from using that land even though by all of them using it the same way the land gets destroyed and they won’t be able to use it again (or at least not for a long time), therefore all of them will suffer (Dawes 2000). In overpopulation for example it can be compared to people using water without any restrictions and wasting it even when not needed. If all seven million (Rosenberg 2010) people on this planet have the same approach and use water even if not needed then the water becomes scarce and the acceptable lifestyle of people on the planet gets affected, or the water just gets all used and people would not be able to live without it.

Why are structural and psychological features important?

Both structural and psychological features are important in solving social dilemma of overpopulation. It is not enough to just apply rules and threat as well as it is not enough to just try to educate people, these features have to be combine in order to get close to solving the overpopulation dilemma.

How to approach a social dilemma?

Approaching social dilemma from a structural understanding would mean attempting to solve the dilemma by interventions that change the incentives one gets when co-operating or not co-operating (Van Vugt et.al. 1996). Interventions would involve rules, which would be expected to be followed by everyone (e.g. strict about food waste). By adjusting the environment (trying to come up with solutions for food, water etc.) and by providing reward for those who follow the rules and strict punishment for those who do not.

What is the dilemma of controlling the population?

Taking into consideration that it would be impossible to solve the dilemma if we only ask seven billion people to control the population, the more likely way to achieve it as mentioned above is tough group formation. Groups such as continents and countries that would be broken down into smaller groups with assigned leaders to be in charge of controlling the population.

Get professional help and free up your time for more important courses

Considering a Social Dilemma in Practice: Using a Code of Ethics to Inform Decision Making. (2018, Nov 13). Retrieved from https://phdessay.com/considering-a-social-dilemma-in-practice-using-a-code-of-ethics-to-inform-decision-making/

Cite this page

Considering a Social Dilemma in Practice: Using a Code of Ethics to Inform Decision Making. (2018, Nov 13). Retrieved from https://phdessay.com/considering-a-social-dilemma-in-practice-using-a-code-of-ethics-to-inform-decision-making/