Group Processes & Intergroup Relations

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Au, W. T.
Right arrow Articles by Ngai, M. Y.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, Vol. 6, No. 3, 265-283 (2003)
DOI: 10.1177/13684302030063004
© 2003 SAGE Publications

Effects of Group Size Uncertainty and Protocol of Play in a Common Pool Resource Dilemma

Wing Tung Au

The Chinese University of Hong Kong, wwtau{at}psy.cuhk.edu.hk

Man Yuen Ngai

The Chinese University of Hong Kong

This study investigated the effect of group size uncertainty in a single-stage step-level common pool resource dilemma under a sequential (SEQ) and a Self-paced Sequential (SPS) protocol of play. In the uncertain group size condition, participants were told that their group was equally likely to be any size between three and seven persons. In the certain group size condition, the group size was always five. In the SEQ protocol, decisions were made in a pre-specified order such that each player knew his or her position in the sequence, as well as the combined requests of all the preceding players in the sequence. In the SPS protocol, participants could choose when to make their decisions. In both protocols, we replicated the position effects—individual requests are inversely related to the players' positions in the sequence with the first mover requesting most, and the last mover requesting the least. We also found that the position effect was stronger in SEQ than in SPS, and when group size was certain than when it was not. Relative to group size certainty, group size uncertainty decreased total requests and increased provision rates.

Key Words: environmental uncertainty • resource dilemma


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Group Processes Intergroup RelationsHome page
E. W. de Kwaadsteniet, E. van Dijk, A. Wit, and D. De Cremer
`How Many of Us Are There?': Group Size Uncertainty and Social Value Orientations in Common Resource Dilemmas
Group Processes Intergroup Relations, July 1, 2008; 11(3): 387 - 399.
[Abstract] [PDF]