Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T18:16:36.851Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Divorcing the puzzles: When group identities foster in-group cooperation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 March 2016

Daniel Seewald ,
Stefanie Hechler  and
Thomas Kessler
Daniel Seewald
Affiliation:
Department of Social Psychology, Friedrich Schiller University, 07743 Jena, Germany. [email protected]@[email protected]://www.sozialpsychologie.uni-jena.de/?lang=en
Stefanie Hechler
Affiliation:
Department of Social Psychology, Friedrich Schiller University, 07743 Jena, Germany. [email protected]@[email protected]://www.sozialpsychologie.uni-jena.de/?lang=en
Thomas Kessler
Affiliation:
Department of Social Psychology, Friedrich Schiller University, 07743 Jena, Germany. [email protected]@[email protected]://www.sozialpsychologie.uni-jena.de/?lang=en
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We argue that general social psychological mechanisms (e.g., common group identity) can account for prosocial behavior and cooperative norms without the need for punishing Big Gods. Moreover, prosocial religions often do not prevent conflict within their religious groups. Hence, we doubt whether Big Gods and prosocial religions are more effective than alternative identities in enhancing high-level cooperation.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 39 , 2016 , e23
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

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.)

References

Balliet, D., Mulder, L. B. & Van Lange, P. A. (2011) Reward, punishment, and cooperation: a meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin 137:594–615.Google Scholar
Brehm, J. W. & Brehm, S. S. (1981) Psychological reactance: A theory of freedom and control. Academic Press.Google Scholar
Brown, R. & Brewer, M. B. (1998) Intergroup relations. In: The handbook of social psychology, vol. 2, fourth edition, ed. Gilbert, D. T., Fiske, S. T. & Lindzey, G., pp. 554–94. McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Dawes, R. M., McTavish, J. & Shaklee, H. (1977) Behavior, communication, and assumptions about other people's behavior in a commons dilemma situation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 35:1–11. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.35.1.1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fehr, E. & Fischbacher, U. (2004a) Social norms and human cooperation. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 8:185–90.Google Scholar
Fehr, E. & Gächter, S. (2002) Altruistic punishment in humans. Nature 415(6868):137–40.Google Scholar
Gürerk, Ö., Irlenbusch, B. & Rockenbach, B. (2006) The competitive advantage of sanctioning institutions. Science 312:108–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haley, K. J. & Fessler, D. M. T. (2005) Nobody's watching? Subtle cues affects generosity in an anonymous economic game. Evolution and Human Behavior 26:245–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Juergensmeyer, M. (2008) Global rebellion: Religious challenges to the secular state, from Christian militias to Al Qaeda. University of California State Press.Google Scholar
Platow, M. J., Grace, D. M. & Smithson, M. J. (2012) Examining the preconditions for psychological group membership perceived social interdependence as the outcome of self-categorization. Social Psychological and Personality Science 3:5–13.Google Scholar
Sherif, M. (1965) Formation of social norms: The experimental paradigm. Basic Studies in Social Psychology. Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.Google Scholar
Tajfel, H., Billig, M. G., Bundy, R. P. & Flament, C. (1971) Social categorization and intergroup behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology 1:149–78.Google Scholar
Tajfel, H. & Turner, J. C. (1979) The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In: Psychology of intergroup relations, ed. Worchel, S. & Austin, W. G., pp. 7–24. Nelson-Hall.Google Scholar
Turner, J. C. (2005) Explaining the nature of power: A three-process theory. European Journal of Social Psychology 35:1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yamagishi, T. & Kiyonari, T. (2000) The group as the container of generalized reciprocity. Social Psychology Quarterly 63:116–32.Google Scholar