Social and general intelligence improves collective action in a common pool resource system

Significance Initiating large-scale collective action to sustain natural resources is a key challenge in a world of global environmental change. Research relevant to meeting this challenge must assess the effects of human cognitive abilities on collective action under multiple scenarios of social and ecological change. This paper illustrates the importance of social and general intelligence for solving a collective action problem. Groups high in general intelligence—useful for modeling natural resources—and social intelligence—useful for modeling social relationships—more effectively and consistently learn to sustain natural resources in an experiment. Our results shed light on the ability of groups/teams to solve collective action problems under changing social–ecological conditions. On a planet experiencing global environmental change, the governance of natural resources depends on sustained collective action by diverse populations. Engaging in such collective action can only build upon the foundation of human cognition in social–ecological settings. To help understand this foundation, we assess the effect of cognitive abilities on the management of a common pool resource. We present evidence that two functionally distinct cognitive abilities, general and social intelligence, improve the ability of groups to manage a common pool resource. Groups high in both forms of intelligence engage in more effective collective action that is also more consistent, despite social or ecological change. This result provides a foundation for integrating the effects of cognitive abilities with other dimensions of cognitive diversity to explain when groups will and will not sustainably govern natural resources.

[1]  K. Arrow The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing , 1962 .

[2]  D. Johnson,et al.  A difference. , 1990, Advancing clinical care : official journal of NOAADN.

[3]  Amy R. Poteete,et al.  Working Together: Collective Action, the Commons, and Multiple Methods in Practice , 2010 .

[4]  E. Papyrakis,et al.  ETHNIC DIVERSITY, PROPERTY RIGHTS, AND NATURAL RESOURCES , 2010 .

[5]  Motoko Kosugi,et al.  Trust, Gullibility, and Social Intelligence , 1999 .

[6]  C. Chabris,et al.  The Impact of Cognitive Style Diversity on Implicit Learning in Teams , 2019, Front. Psychol..

[7]  Anne-Sophie Crépin,et al.  Collective action and the risk of ecosystem regime shifts: insights from a laboratory experiment , 2015 .

[8]  Herbert A. Marlowe,et al.  Social intelligence: Evidence for multidimensionality and construct independence. , 1986 .

[9]  A. Falk,et al.  Are Risk Aversion and Impatience Related to Cognitive Ability? , 2007, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[10]  G. Brady Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action , 1993 .

[11]  A. Jensen,et al.  The g factor , 1996, Nature.

[12]  Simon A. Levin,et al.  Public goods in relation to competition, cooperation, and spite , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[13]  E. Ostrom A Behavioral Approach to the Rational Choice Theory of Collective Action: Presidential Address, American Political Science Association, 1997 , 1998, American Political Science Review.

[14]  C. Chabris,et al.  Reading the Mind in the Eyes or Reading between the Lines? Theory of Mind Predicts Collective Intelligence Equally Well Online and Face-To-Face , 2014, PloS one.

[15]  D. Meyer,et al.  Supporting Online Material Materials and Methods Som Text Figs. S1 to S6 References Evidence for a Collective Intelligence Factor in the Performance of Human Groups , 2022 .

[16]  Thomas R. Coyle,et al.  SAT and ACT predict college GPA after removing g , 2008 .

[17]  Brian M. Wood,et al.  Hunter-Gatherer Inter-Band Interaction Rates: Implications for Cumulative Culture , 2014, PloS one.

[18]  M. Janssen,et al.  Irrigation experiments in the lab: trust, environmental variability, and collective action , 2015 .

[19]  D. Dodell-Feder,et al.  Using Fiction to Assess Mental State Understanding: A New Task for Assessing Theory of Mind in Adults , 2013, PloS one.

[20]  C. Runge,et al.  Common property and collective action in economic development , 1986 .

[21]  A. Alesina,et al.  Fractionalization , 2002 .

[22]  T. Coyle,et al.  The functional intelligences proposition , 2016 .

[23]  Robin I. M. Dunbar The Social Brain: Mind, Language, and Society in Evolutionary Perspective , 2003 .

[24]  Ishani Aggarwal,et al.  The Insensitive Ruins It All: Compositional and Compilational Influences of Social Sensitivity on Collective Intelligence in Groups , 2016, Front. Psychol..

[25]  T. Coyle,et al.  General Intelligence (g), ACT Scores, and Theory of Mind: (ACT)g Predicts Limited Variance Among Theory of Mind Tests , 2018, Intelligence.

[26]  Murray R. Barrick,et al.  Relating member ability and personality to work-team processes and team effectiveness. , 1998 .

[27]  Lu Hong,et al.  Groups of diverse problem solvers can outperform groups of high-ability problem solvers. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[28]  Daniel Nettle,et al.  Agreeableness is related to social‐cognitive, but not social‐perceptual, theory of mind , 2008 .

[29]  Robert Arlinghaus,et al.  Wisdom of the crowd and natural resource management. , 2013, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[30]  Elizabeth J. Austin,et al.  Associations of trait and ability emotional intelligence with performance on Theory of Mind tasks in an adult sample , 2010 .

[31]  A. Arenas,et al.  Multiplex social ecological network analysis reveals how social changes affect community robustness more than resource depletion , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[32]  E. Ostrom Understanding Institutional Diversity , 2005 .

[33]  Tam The Nguyen,et al.  The importance of cognitive diversity for sustaining the commons , 2019, Nature Communications.

[34]  R. Hinde,et al.  The Possibility of Cooperation@@@Cooperation: The Basis of Sociability.@@@Cooperation and Prosocial Behavior.@@@Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. , 1990 .

[35]  E. Bullmore,et al.  Social intelligence in the normal and autistic brain: an fMRI study , 1999, The European journal of neuroscience.

[36]  Arnaud Dragicevic,et al.  Forest planning and productivity-risk trade-off through the Markowitz mean-variance model , 2016 .

[37]  L. Weingart,et al.  Representational gaps, information processing, and conflict in functionally diverse teams , 2007 .

[38]  Robert Arlinghaus,et al.  Wisdom of stakeholder crowds in complex social–ecological systems , 2020, Nature Sustainability.

[39]  General , 1970 .

[40]  L. Weingart,et al.  Conflict across representational gaps: Threats to and opportunities for improved communication , 2019, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[41]  Douglas K. Detterman,et al.  ACT and General Cognitive Ability. , 2008 .

[42]  S. Page Prologue to The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies , 2007 .

[43]  E. Ostrom,et al.  Lab Experiments for the Study of Social-Ecological Systems , 2010, Science.

[44]  W. Heath The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies , 2008 .