首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>other >From Good Institutions to Generous Citizens: Top-Down Incentives to Cooperate Promote Subsequent Prosociality But Not Norm Enforcement
【2h】

From Good Institutions to Generous Citizens: Top-Down Incentives to Cooperate Promote Subsequent Prosociality But Not Norm Enforcement

机译:从良好的制度到慷慨的公民:自上而下的合作激励措施可促进随后的社会繁荣而不是规范执行

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

What makes people willing to pay costs to help others, and to punish others’ selfishness? Why does the extent of such behaviors vary markedly across cultures? To shed light on these questions, we explore the role of formal institutions in shaping individuals’ prosociality and punishment. In Study 1 (N=707), American participants who reported living under higher quality cooperation-enforcing institutions (police and courts) gave significantly more in a Dictator Game (DG), but did not punish significantly more in a Third-Party Punishment Game (TPPG). In Study 1R (N=1,705), we replicated the positive relationship between reported institutional quality and DG giving observed in Study 1. In Study 2 (N=516), we experimentally manipulated institutional quality in a repeated Public Goods Game with a centralized punishment institution. Consistent with the correlational results of Study 1 and 1R, we found that centralized punishment led to significantly more prosociality in a subsequent DG compared to a no-punishment control, but had no significant direct effect on subsequent TPPG punishment (only an indirect effect via increased DG giving). Thus we present convergent evidence that the quality of institutions one is exposed to “spills over” to subsequent prosociality but not punishment. These findings support a theory of social heuristics, suggest boundary conditions on spillover effects of cooperation, and demonstrate the power of effective institutions for instilling habits of virtue and creating cultures of cooperation.
机译:是什么使人们愿意为帮助他人和惩罚他人的自私而付出代价?为什么这种行为的程度在不同文化之间有显着差异?为了阐明这些问题,我们探讨了正规机构在塑造个人的社会和惩罚方面的作用。在研究1(N = 707)中,据报告生活在较高质量的合作执行机构(警察和法院)下的美国参与者在独裁者游戏(DG)中付出了更多,而在第三方惩罚游戏中却没有受到更多惩罚(TPPG)。在研究1R(N = 1,705)中,我们复制了报告的机构质量与研究1中观察到的DG提供之间的正相关关系。在研究2(N = 516)中,我们通过重复的公共物品博弈以集中惩罚的方式实验性地操纵了机构质量。机构。与研究1和1R的相关结果一致,我们发现与无惩罚控制相比,集中惩罚在后续DG中导致了更多的亲社会关系,但对随后的TPPG惩罚没有显着直接影响(仅通过增加间接影响DG给予)。因此,我们提供了越来越多的证据,表明制度的质量可能会遭受“溢价”,继而遭受随后的社会富裕而不是惩罚。这些发现支持一种社会启发式理论,为合作的溢出效应提出了边界条件,并证明了有效机构在培养美德习惯和创造合作文化方面的力量。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号