Third parties promote cooperative norms in repeated interactions

Abstract How likely are third parties to intervene in repeated conflicts between adversaries? Can third party intervention redirect competitive interactions toward collectively beneficial cooperation? Does mutual cooperation persist when the third party can no longer intervene in the conflict? To address these theoretically and practically important questions, we introduce the Repeated Peacemaker Game. Adversaries and third parties interacted for 60 game rounds in our incentivized experiment, producing a rich dataset of 7200 decisions. Participants made decisions under one of two conditions: In the Early Intervention condition, third party intervention was initially possible and then became impossible. In the Late Intervention condition, third party intervention was initially impossible and then became possible. Third parties in the Early Intervention condition intervened at high rates and established cooperative norms that outlasted the intervention period, resulting in sustainable cooperation even after intervention was no longer possible. By comparison, third parties in the Late Intervention condition intervened at relatively lower rates, but still effectively promoted cooperation, despite the initial history of competition between adversaries. We find strong evidence for ‘conditional cooperation’, whereby adversaries and third parties reciprocate each other's choices in preceding rounds: Adversaries were more likely to cooperate when third parties intervened in the preceding round; third parties, in turn, were more likely to intervene when one or both adversaries cooperated in the preceding round than if both adversaries competed in the preceding round. These findings help explain when, why, and how third parties promote cooperation in groups.

[1]  H. Kelley,et al.  Interpersonal relations: A theory of interdependence , 1978 .

[2]  U. Fischbacher,et al.  Are People Conditionally Cooperative? Evidence from a Public Goods Experiment , 2001 .

[3]  D. Messick,et al.  Sanctioning Systems, Decision Frames, and Cooperation , 1999 .

[4]  Sonia Roccas,et al.  The paradox of group-based guilt: modes of national identification, conflict vehemence, and reactions to the in-group's moral violations. , 2006, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[5]  E. Ostrom Collective action and the evolution of social norms , 2000, Journal of Economic Perspectives.

[6]  U. Fischbacher z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments , 1999 .

[7]  Ryan O. Murphy,et al.  Social Value Orientation , 2014, Personality and social psychology review : an official journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

[8]  Roderick M. Kramer,et al.  Trust and distrust in organizations: emerging perspectives, enduring questions. , 1999, Annual review of psychology.

[9]  Ernst Fehr,et al.  Parochial altruism in humans , 2006, Nature.

[10]  A. Roth,et al.  Maximization, learning, and economic behavior , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

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

[12]  W. Hamilton,et al.  The Evolution of Cooperation , 1984 .

[13]  Nir Halevy,et al.  Mind games: the mental representation of conflict. , 2012, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[14]  T. Yamagishi,et al.  Preemptive strike: An experimental study of fear-based aggression , 2013 .

[15]  U. Fischbacher,et al.  Strong reciprocity, human cooperation, and the enforcement of social norms , 2002, Human nature.

[16]  Robb Willer,et al.  Gossip and Ostracism Promote Cooperation in Groups , 2014, Psychological science.

[17]  Ori Weisel,et al.  “In-Group Love” and “Out-Group Hate” in Repeated Interaction Between Groups , 2012 .

[18]  Ernst Fehr,et al.  Third Party Punishment and Social Norms , 2004 .

[19]  B. Frey,et al.  Social Comparisons and Pro-social Behavior: Testing "Conditional Cooperation" in a Field Experiment , 2004 .

[20]  P. V. Lange,et al.  Reputation management: Why and how gossip enhances generosity , 2016 .

[21]  Jane L. Risen,et al.  Befriending the enemy: Outgroup friendship longitudinally predicts intergroup attitudes in a coexistence program for Israelis and Palestinians , 2016 .

[22]  N. Halevy,et al.  Selfish third parties act as peacemakers by transforming conflicts and promoting cooperation , 2015, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[23]  Nir Halevy,et al.  Conflict Templates , 2013 .

[24]  An investment game with third-party intervention , 2008 .

[25]  P. V. Lange,et al.  The pursuit of joint outcomes and equality in outcomes: An integrative model of social value orientation. , 1999 .

[26]  K. Jehn,et al.  The paradox of intragroup conflict: a meta-analysis. , 2012, The Journal of applied psychology.

[27]  Matthias Sutter,et al.  Third-party punishment increases cooperation in children through (misaligned) expectations and conditional cooperation , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[28]  Putting the cart before the horse: the benefits of arbitrating before mediating. , 2002 .

[29]  D. Balliet Communication and Cooperation in Social Dilemmas: A Meta-Analytic Review , 2010 .

[30]  Jeffrey Z. Rubin,et al.  Experimental research on third-party intervention in conflict: toward some generalizations. , 1980, Psychological bulletin.

[31]  Eric van Dijk,et al.  On the willingness to costly reward cooperation and punish non-cooperation: The moderating role of type of social dilemma , 2014 .

[32]  D. Malhotra,et al.  The Effects of Contracts on Interpersonal Trust , 2002 .

[33]  J. K. Murnighan,et al.  The social and ethical consequences of a calculative mindset , 2014 .

[34]  C. Insko,et al.  War and Peace: Possible Approaches to Reducing Intergroup Conflict , 2008, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[35]  David G. Rand,et al.  Habits of Virtue: Creating Norms of Cooperation and Defection in the Laboratory , 2015 .

[36]  Nir Halevy,et al.  “In-Group Love” and “Out-Group Hate” as Motives for Individual Participation in Intergroup Conflict , 2008, Psychological science.

[37]  C. Boehm Ancestral Hierarchy and Conflict , 2012, Science.

[38]  Jeanne M. Brett,et al.  Designing systems for resolving disputes in organizations. , 1990 .

[39]  Daniel Balliet,et al.  Reward, punishment, and cooperation: a meta-analysis. , 2011, Psychological bulletin.