When Does Gossip Promote Generosity? Indirect Reciprocity Under the Shadow of the Future

Social Psychological and Personality Science

Volumn 6, Issue 8, 2015, Pages 923-930

  Wu, Junhui ^a   Balliet, Daniel ^a   Van Lange, Paul A M ^a  

^a VU UNIVERSITY AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

future interdependence; generosity; gossip; gossip recipient; reputational concern

Indexed keywords

EID: 84943140529     PISSN: 19485506     EISSN: 19485514     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1948550615595272     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. D.BallietC.ParksJ.Joireman (2009). Social value orientation and cooperation in social dilemmas: A meta-analysis. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 12, 533–547. doi:10.1177/1368430209105040
2. P.Barclay (2010). Harnessing the power of reputation: Strengths and limits for promoting cooperative behaviors. Evolutionary Psychology: An International Journal of Evolutionary Approaches to Psychology and Behavior, 10, 868–883.
3. M.BatesonD.NettleG.Roberts (2006). Cues of being watched enhance cooperation in a real-world setting. Biology Letters, 2, 412–414. doi:10.1098/rsbl.2006.0509
4. B.BeersmaG.A.Van Kleef (2011). How the grapevine keeps you in line: Gossip increases contributions to the group. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2, 642–649. doi:10.1177/1948550611405073
5. J.BergJ.DickhautK.McCabe (1995). Trust, reciprocity, and social history. Games and Economic Behavior, 10, 122–142.
6. W.M.BrucksP.A.M.Van Lange (2007). When prosocials act like proselfs in a commons dilemma. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 750–758. doi:10.1177/0146167206298569
7. N.CavazzaS.PagliaroM.Guidetti (2014). Antecedents of concern for personal reputation: The role of group entitativity and fear of social exclusion. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 36, 365–376. doi:10.1080/01973533.2014.925453
8. O.CurryR.I.M.Dunbar (2011). Altruism in networks: The effect of connections. Biology Letters, 7, 651–653. doi:10.1098/rsbl.2010.1202
9. R.I.M.Dunbar (2004). Gossip in evolutionary perspective. Review of General Psychology, 8, 100–110. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.8.2.100
10. N.Emler (1990). A social psychology of reputation. European Review of Social Psychology, 1, 171–193. doi:10.1080/14792779108401861
11. M.Ernest-JonesD.NettleM.Bateson (2011). Effects of eye images on everyday cooperative behavior: A field experiment. Evolution and Human Behavior, 32, 172–178. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2010.10.006
12. M.FeinbergR.WillerM.Schultz (2014). Gossip and ostracism promote cooperation in groups. Psychological Science, 25, 656–664. doi:10.1177/0956797613510184
13. M.FeinbergR.WillerJ.StellarD.Keltner (2012). The virtues of gossip: Reputational information sharing as prosocial behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 1015–1030. doi:10.1037/a0026650
14. R.ForsytheJ.HorowitzN.SavinM.Sefton (1994). Fairness in simple bargaining experiments. Games and Economic Behavior, 6, 347–369. doi:10.1006/game.1994.1021
15. E.K.Foster (2004). Research on gossip: Taxonomy, methods, and future directions. Review of General Psychology, 8, 78–99. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.8.2.78
16. K.J.HaleyD.M.T.Fessler (2005). Nobody’s watching? Subtle cues affect generosity in an anonymous economic game. Evolution and Human Behavior, 26, 245–256. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2005.01.002
17. A.F.Hayes (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
18. A.F.Hayes (2015). An index and test of linear moderated mediation. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 50, 1–22. doi:10.1080/00273171.2014.962683
19. R.MeleadyT.HopthrowR.J.Crisp (2013). Simulating social dilemmas: Promoting cooperative behavior through imagined group discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104, 839–853. doi:10.1037/a0031233
20. N.MifuneH.HashimotoT.Yamagishi (2010). Altruism toward in-group members as a reputation mechanism. Evolution and Human Behavior, 31, 109–117. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2009.09.004
21. M.MilinskiD.SemmannT.C.BakkerH.J.Krambeck (2001). Cooperation through indirect reciprocity: Image scoring or standing strategy?Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 268, 2495–2501. doi:10.1098/rspb.2001.1809
22. M.MilinskiD.SemmannH.-J.Krambeck (2002). Reputation helps solve the “tragedy of the commons”. Nature, 415, 424–426. doi:10.1038/415424a
23. R.O.MurphyK.A.AckermannM.J.J.Handgraaf (2011). Measuring social value orientation. Judgment and Decision Making, 6, 771–781.
24. M.A.NowakK.Sigmund (2005). Evolution of indirect reciprocity. Nature, 437, 1291–1298. doi:10.1038/nature04131
25. J.PiazzaJ.M.Bering (2008). Concerns about reputation via gossip promote generous allocations in an economic game. Evolution and Human Behavior, 29, 172–178. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2007.12.002
26. K.J.PreacherA.F.Hayes (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879–891. doi:10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
27. J.Scott (2000). Rational choice theory. In G.BrowningA.HalcliF.Webster (Eds.), Understanding contemporary society: Theories of the present (pp. 126–138). London: Sage. doi:10.4135/9781446218310
28. B.SimpsonR.Willer (2008). Altruism and indirect reciprocity: The interaction of person and situation in prosocial behavior. Social Psychology Quarterly, 71, 37–52. doi:10.1177/019027250807100106
29. E.R.SmithE.C.Collins (2009). Contextualizing person perception: Distributed social cognition. Psychological Review, 116, 343–364. doi:10.1037/a0015072
30. R.D.SommerfeldH.-J.KrambeckM.Milinski (2008). Multiple gossip statements and their effect on reputation and trustworthiness. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 275, 2529–2536. doi:10.1098/rspb.2008.0762
31. D.SperberN.Baumard (2012). Moral reputation: An evolutionary and cognitive perspective. Mind & Language, 27, 495–518. doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-6287-2
32. M.Van BommelJ.-W.Van ProoijenH.ElffersP.A.M.Van Lange (2012). Be aware to care: Public self-awareness leads to a reversal of the bystander effect. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 926–930. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2012.02.011
33. P.A.M.Van Lange (1999). The pursuit of joint outcomes and equality in outcomes: An integrative model of social value orientation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 337–349. doi:10.1037/0022- 3514.77.2.337
34. P.A.M.Van LangeC.R.AgnewF.HarinckG.E.M.Steemers (1997). From game theory to real life: How social value orientation affects willingness to sacrifice in ongoing close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1330–1344. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.73.6.1330
35. P.A.M.Van LangeE.De BruinW.OttenJ.A.Joireman (1997). Development of prosocial, individualistic, and competitive orientations: Theory and preliminary evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 733–746. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.73.4.733
36. P.A.M.Van LangeA.KlapwijkL.M.Van Munster (2011). How the shadow of the future might promote cooperation. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 14, 857–870. doi:10.1177/1368430211402102
37. T.YamagishiN.Mifune (2008). Does shared group membership promote altruism? Fear, greed, and reputation. Rationality and Society, 20, 5–30. doi:10.1177/1043463107085442
38. E.YoeliM.HoffmanD.G.RandM.A.Nowak (2013). Powering up with indirect reciprocity in a large-scale field experiment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110, 10424–10429. doi:10.1073/pnas.1301210110