Is Voting for a Cartel a Sign of Cooperativeness?

This paper tests the hypothesis that a (partial) reason why cartels—collective but costly and non-binding price agreements—lead to higher prices in a Bertrand oligopoly could be because of a selection effect: decision-makers who are willing to form price agreements are more likely to be less competitive and pick higher prices in general. To test this hypothesis we run an experiment where participants play two consecutive Bertrand pricing games: first a standard version without the opportunity to form agreements; followed by a version where participants can vote whether to have a (costly) non-binding agreement as a group to pick the highest number. We find no statistically significant difference between the numbers picked in the first game by participants who vote for and against an agreement in the second game. We do confirm that having a non-binding agreement to cooperate leads to higher numbers being picked on average. Both participants who voted for and against the agreement increase the number they pick in situations with an agreement. However, this effect is bigger for participants who voted in favour.

The group discussion effect: integrative processes and suggestions for implementation

One of the most consistent findings in experimental social dilemmas research is the positive effect group discussion has on cooperative behavior. At a time when cooperation and consensus is critical to tackle global problems, ranging from debt to deforestation, understanding the dynamics of group discussion is a pressing need. Unfortunately, research investigating the underlying processes and implementation of the effect has been inconclusive. The authors present a critical review of existing explanations and integrate these perspectives into a single process model of group discussion, providing a more complete theoretical picture of how interrelated factors combine to facilitate discussion-induced cooperation. On the basis of this theoretical analysis, they consider complimentary approaches to the indirect and feasible implementation of group discussion. They argue that such strategies may overcome the barriers to direct discussion observed across a range of groups and organizations.

Can group discussion promote cooperative ultimatum bargaining?

The influence of discussion-induced shared cognition on bargaining behavior was examined. Three studies tested the hypothesis that shared cognition regarding the best method for reaching a bargaining agreement would decrease the frequency of selfish offers. Consistent with this prediction, participants who engaged in such a group discussion made less selfish offers than those who did not discuss (all studies) or those who engaged in a group discussion regarding commonalities that they shared (Study 2). Study 3 showed that the discussion effect was mediated by shared cognition developed through the discussion. Thus, discussion regarding how best to reach bargaining settlements may develop shared cognition that assists in cooperative bargaining. Implications and limitations of the studies are discussed.

Prospects for Group Processes and Intergroup Relations Research: A Review of 70 Years' Progress

Three archival analyses are presented substantially extending empirical reviews of the progress of group-related research. First, an analysis of social psychological research from 1935 to 2007 (cf. Abrams & Hogg, 1998) showed that group-related research has a steadily increasing proportion of titles in the principal journals and currently accounts for over a sixth of all the research in our list of social psychological journals. Second, analysis of the most cited papers from a set of principal social psychology journals from 1998 to 2007 showed that a third of high-impact articles in social psychology focus on groups. Third, analysis of the content of two major specialist journals in the field, Group Processes & Intergroup Relations and Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, showed that together these journals cover a broad range of group-related research, and that the only keyword common to both journals was social identity. These findings demonstrate the health and major contributions of research into group processes and intergroup relations to social psychology as a whole.