Hostname: page-component-669899f699-chc8l Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-25T15:54:57.548Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Blood, sex, personality, power, and altruism: Factors influencing the validity of strong reciprocity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2012

Eamonn Ferguson  and
Philip Corr
Eamonn Ferguson
Affiliation:
Personality and Social Psychology Group, School of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, United Kingdom. [email protected]://www.psychology.nottingham.ac.uk/staff/ef/home.html
Philip Corr
Affiliation:
School of Social Work and Psychology, and Centre for Behavioural and Experimental Social Science (CBESS); University of East Anglia., Norwich NR4 7TJ, United Kingdom. [email protected]://www.ueapsychology.net/differential-psychology-pg14.html
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

It is argued that the generality of strong reciprocity theory (SRT) is limited by the existence of anonymous spontaneous cooperation, maintained in the absence of punishment, despite free-riding. We highlight how individual differences, status, sex, and the legitimacy of non-cooperation need to be examined to increase the internal and ecological validity of SRT experiments and, ultimately, SRT's external validity.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 35 , Issue 1 , February 2012 , pp. 25 - 26
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Andreoni, J. (1990) Impure altruism and donations to public goods: A theory of warm glow giving. The Economic Journal 100(401):464–477.Google Scholar
Archer, J. (2004) Sex differences in aggression in real-world settings: A meta-analytic review. Review of General Psychology 8:291–322.Google Scholar
Archer, J. & Benson, D. (2008) Physical aggression as a function of perceived fighting ability and provocation: An experimental investigation. Aggressive Behavior 34:9–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Buss, D. M. & Duntley, J. D. (2008) Adaptations for exploitation. Group Dynamics 12:53–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckel, C. C., Fatas, E. & Wilson, R. (2010) Cooperation and status in organizations. Journal of Public Economic Theory 12:737–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferguson, E., Atsma, F., de Kort, W. & Veldhuizen, I. (in press) Exploring the pattern of blood donor beliefs in first time, novice and experienced donors: Differentiating reluctant altruism, pure altruism, impure altruism and warm-glow. (Published online before print, August 16, 2011. DOI:10.1111/j.1537-2995.2011.03279.x).Google Scholar
Ferguson, E. & Chandler, S. (2005) A stage model of blood donor behaviour: Assessing voluntary behaviour. Journal of Health Psychology 10:359–72.Google Scholar
Ferguson, E., Farrell, K. & Lawrence, C. (2008) Blood donation is an act of benevolence rather than altruism. Health Psychology 27:327–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ferguson, E., France, C. R, Abraham, C., Ditto, B. & Sheeran, P. (2007) Improving blood donor recruitment and retention: Integrating social and behavioral sciences agendas. Transfusion 47:1999–2010.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ferguson, E., Heckman, J. J. & Corr, P. J. (2011) Personality and economics: Overview and proposed framework Personality and Individual Differences 51:201–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
List, J. A. (2009) Social preferences: Some thoughts from the field. Annual Review of Economics 1:563–79.Google Scholar
Lotem, A., Fishman, M. A. & Stone, L. (1999) Evolution of cooperation between individuals. Nature 400:226–27.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
MacLean, R. C., Fuentes-Hernandez, A., Greig, D., Hurst, L. D. & Gudelj, I. (2010) A mixture of “cheats” and “co-operators” can enable maximal group benefit. PLoS Biology 8(9):e1000486.Google Scholar
O'Carroll, R. E., Foster, C., McGeechan, G., Sandford, K. & Ferguson, E. (2011) The “ick factor,” anticipated regret and willingness to become an organ donor. Health Psychology 30:236–45.Google Scholar
Piliavin, J. A. & Callero, P. L. (1991) Giving blood: The development of an altruistic identity. Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Spitzer, M., Fischbacher, U., Herrnberger, B., Grön, G. & Fehr, E. (2007) The neural signature of norm compliance. Neuron 56:185–96. Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S089662730700709X.Google Scholar
Ule, A., Schram, A., Riedl, A. & Cason, T. N. (2009) Indirect punishment and generosity towards strangers. Science 326(5960):1701–704. Available at: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/326/5960/1701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wischniewski, J., Windmann, S., Juckel, G. & Brune, M. (2009) Rules of social exchange: Game theory, individual differences and psychopathology. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews 33:305–13.Google Scholar