Why Do Cooperators Cooperate?: Efficacy as a Moderator of Social Motive Effects

Two alternative explanations for the effect of social motives on cooperation in social dilemmas were identified. One explanation (a transformation explanation) suggests that those with more cooperative social motives attach greater weight to others’ outcomes. The other explanation (a moral explanation) suggests that those with more cooperative social motives are generally more concerned with acting in a morally-prescribed fashion. The transformation explanation predicts that social motive effects should be moderated by the efficacy of cooperation; the moral explanation predicts no such moderating effect. An experiment that tested these competing predictions is reported. Its results supported a dual-process model—the transformation explanation holds under conditions where it is unclear whether or not cooperation is morally prescribed (e.g., when there had been no prior discussion of the dilemma), whereas the moral explanation holds under conditions where it is clearer that to cooperate is to ‘do the right thing’ (e.g. following group discussion of the dilemma).

[1]  H. Wilke,et al.  Experimental social dilemmas , 1986 .

[2]  John Orbell,et al.  Explaining discussion-induced cooperation. , 1988 .

[3]  N. Kerr,et al.  Communication, commitment, and cooperation in social dilemma. , 1994 .

[4]  Ramzi Suleiman,et al.  Resource dilemmas with environmental uncertainty and asymmetric players , 1990 .

[5]  Charles G. McClintock,et al.  Social values: Their definition, measurement and development. , 1978 .

[6]  Secrecy and Solidarity , 1976 .

[7]  Wim B. G. Liebrand,et al.  Role of interdependence structure, individual value orientation, and another's strategy in social decision making: a transformational analysis , 1988 .

[8]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Joining Together: Group Theory and Group Skills , 1975 .

[9]  N. Kerr.  “Does My Contribution Really Matter?”: Efficacy in Social Dilemmas , 1996 .

[10]  John Orbell,et al.  The Minimal Contributing Set as a Solution to Public Goods Problems , 1983, American Political Science Review.

[11]  Robyn M. Dawes,et al.  Behavior, communication, and assumptions about other people's behavior in a commons dilemma situation. , 1977 .

[12]  Norbert L. Kerr,et al.  Might versus Morality Explored: Motivational and Cognitive Bases for Social Motives , 1991 .

[13]  P. Bonacich.  Norms and cohesion as adaptive responses to potential conflict: an experimental study. , 1972, Sociometry.

[14]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Joining together: Group theory and group skills, 5th ed. , 1994 .

[15]  N. Kerr.  Efficacy as a causal and moderating variable in social dilemmas. , 1992 .

[16]  G. H. Lunney,et al.  USING ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE WITH A DICHOTOMOUS DEPENDENT VARIABLE: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY , 1970 .

[17]  Wim B. G. Liebrand,et al.  Might over morality: Social values and the perception of other players in experimental games , 1986 .

[18]  Jacob Cohen.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[19]  D. Messick,et al.  Motivational bases of choice in experimental games , 1968 .

[20]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. , 1986, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[21]  Wim B. G. Liebrand,et al.  The ring measure of social values: A computerized procedure for assessing individual differences in information processing and social value orientation , 1988 .

[22]  Paul A. M. Van Lange,et al.  Social Value Orientations and Impressions of Partner's Honesty and Intelligence: A Test of the Might Versus Morality Effect , 1994 .

[23]  D. M. Kuhlman,et al.  Individual differences in game motivation as moderators of preprogrammed strategy effects in prisoner's dilemma. , 1975, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[24]  A. Greenwald.  Consequences of Prejudice Against the Null Hypothesis , 1975 .

[25]  David M. Messick,et al.  Social values and cooperative response to a simulated resource conservation crisis , 1986 .

[26]  P. V. van Lange,et al.  On perceiving morality and potency: Social values and the effects of person perception in a give‐some dilemma , 1989 .

[27]  Wim B. G. Liebrand,et al.  The effects of social motives on behavior in social dilemmas in two cultures. , 1985 .