This Article Abstract Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Au, W. T. Articles by Ngai, M. Y. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

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

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

References

• Allison, S. T., McQueen, L. R., & Schaerfl, L. M. (1992). Social decision making processes and the equal partitionment of shared resources . Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 28, 23-42 .[CrossRef]
• Biel, A., & Gärling, T. (1995). The role of uncertainty in resource dilemmas . Journal of Environmental Psychology, 15, 221-233 .[CrossRef]
• Brewer, M. B., & Kramer, R. M. (1986). Choice behavior in social dilemmas: Effects of social identity, group size, and decision framing . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 543-549 .[CrossRef][ISI]
• Brunner, E. J. (1998). Free riders or easy riders? An examination of the voluntary provision of public radio . Public Choice, 97, 587-604 .[CrossRef]
• Buckley, T., & Sniezek, J. (1992). Passion, preference, and predicitability in judgemental forecasting . Psychological Reports, 70(3, Pt. 2).
• Budescu, D. V., & Au, W. T. (2002). Sequential effects in common pool resources . Journal of Behavioral Decision Making.
• Budescu, D. V., Au, W. T., & Chen, X. P. (1997). Effect of protocol of play and social orientation on behavior in sequential resource dilemmas . Experimental Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 65, 179-193 .
• Budescu, D. V., & Bruderman, M. (1995). The relationship between the illusion of control and desirability bias . Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 8, 109-125 .
• Budescu, D. V., Rapoport, A., & Suleiman, R. (1990). Resources dilemmas with environmental uncertainty and asymmetric players . European Journal of Social Psychology, 20, 475-487 .
• Budescu, D. V., Rapoport, A., & Suleiman, R. (1992). Simultaneous vs. sequential requests in resource dilemmas with incomplete information . Acta Psychologica, 80, 297-310 .[CrossRef]
• Budescu, D. V., Rapoport, A., & Suleiman, R. (1995). Common pool resource dilemmas under uncertainty: Qualitative tests of equilibrium solutions . Games and Economic Behavior, 10, 171-201 .
• Budescu, D. V., Suleiman, R., & Rapoport, A. (1995). Positional order and group size effects in resource dilemmas with uncertain resources . Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 61, 225-238 .[CrossRef]
• Dawes, R. M. (1975). Formal models of dilemmas in social decision making. In M. Kaplan & S. Schwartz (Eds.), Human judgement and decision processes (pp. 87-107). New York: Academic Press .
• De Vries, S., & Wilke, H. A. M. (1992). Constrained egoism and resource management under uncertainty. In W. Liebrand, D. M. Messick, & H. Wilke (Eds.), Social dilemmas: Theoretical issues and research findings (pp. 81-99). Oxford: Pergamon .
• Dorsey, R. E. (1992). The voluntary contributions mechanism with real time revisions . Public Choice, 73, 261-282 .[CrossRef]
• Fischer, I., & Budescu, D. V. (1995). Desirability and hindsight biases in predicting results of a multi- party election. In J. P. Caverni, M. Bar Hillel, F. H. Barron, & H. Jungerman, (Eds.), Contributions to decision making (pp. 193-211). Amsterdam: Elsevier .
• Gardner, R., Ostrom, E., & Walker, J. (1990). The nature of common-pool resource problems . Rationality and Society, 2, 335-358 .[Abstract]
• Gärling, T., Biel, A., & Gustafsson, M. (1998). Different kinds and roles of environmental uncertainty . Journal of Environmental Psychology, 18, 75-83 .
• Gärling, T., Gustafsson, M., & Biel, A. (1999). Managing uncertain common resources. In M. Foddy & M. Smithson (Eds.), Resolving social dilemmas: Dynamic, structural, and intergroup aspects (pp. 219-225). Philadelphia: Psychology Press .
• Goetze, L., Glover, T. F., & Biswas, B. (1993). The effects of group size and income on contributions to the corporation for Public Broadcasting . Public Choice, 77, 407-414 .[CrossRef]
• Goren, H., Kurzban, R., & Rapoport, A. (2001, July). Revocable versus irrevocable contributions in public goods experiments under the real-time . Paper presented at the meeting of the Ninth International Conference on Social Dilemmas, Chicago, IL.
• Gustafsson, M., Biel, A., & Gärling, T. (1999a). Outcome-desirability bias in resource management problems . Thinking and Reasoning, 5, 327-337 .
• Gustafsson, M., Biel, A., & Gärling, T. (1999b). Overharvesting of resources of unknown size . Acta Psychologica, 103, 47-64 .[CrossRef]
• Gustafsson, M., Biel, A., & Gärling, T. (2000). Egoism bias in social dilemmas with resource uncertainty . Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 3, 351-365 .[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• Hamburger, H., Guyer, M., & Fox, J. (1975). Group size and cooperation . Journal of Conflict Resolution, 19, 503-531 .
• Hardin, G. R. (1968). The tragedy of the commons . Science, 162, 1243-1248 .[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• Harrison, G. W., & Hirshleifer, J. (1989). An experimental evaluation of weakest-link/best-shot models of public goods . Journal of Political Economics, 97, 201-225 .[CrossRef]
• Hine, D. W., & Gifford, R. (1996). Attributions about self and others in common dilemmas . European Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 429-445 .[CrossRef]
• Isaac, M., & Walker, J. (1988). Group size effects in public goods provision: The voluntary contribution mechanism . Quarterly Journal of Economics, 53, 179-200 .
• Issac, R. M., Walker, J. M., & Williams, A. W. (1994). Group size and the voluntary provision of public goods: experimental evidence utilizing very large groups . Journal of Public Economics, 54, 1-36 .[CrossRef]
• Kim, J. W., & Murnighan, J. K. (1997). The effects of connectedness and self interest in the organizational volunteer dilemma . International Journal of Conflict Management, 8, 32-51 .
• Kollock, P. (1998). Social dilemmas: The anatomy of cooperation . Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 183-214 .[CrossRef][ISI]
• Komorita, S. S., & Lapworth, C. W. (1982). Cooperative choice among individuals versus groups in an N-person dilemma situation . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 487-496 .[CrossRef]
• Komorita, S. S., & Parks, C. D. (1995). Interpersonal relations: Mixed-motive interaction . Annual Review of Psychology, 46, 183-207 .[CrossRef][ISI]
• Kurzban, R., & Houser, D. (2001). Individual differences in cooperation in a circular public goods game . European Journal of Personality.
• Kurzban, R., McCabe, K, Smith, V. L., & Wilson, B. J. (2001). Incremental commitment and reciprocity in a real time public goods game. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.
• Larrick, R. P., & Blount, S. (1997). The claiming effect: Why players are more generous in social dilemmas than in ultimatum games . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 810-825 .[CrossRef][ISI]
• Liebrand, W. B. G. (1984). The effect of social motives, communication, and group size on behavior in an N-person multi-stage mixed-motive game . European Journal of Social Psychology, 14, 239-264 .
• Lipford, J. W. (1995). Group size and the free-rider hypothesis: An examination of new evidence from churches . Public Choice, 83(3-4), 291-303 .[CrossRef]
• Marwell, G., & Ames, R. E. (1979). Experiments on the provision of public goods, resources, interest, group size, and the free-rider problem . American Journal of Sociology, 84, 1335-1360 .[CrossRef]
• Messick, D. M. (1973). To join or not to join: An approach to the unionization decision . Organisational Behavior and Human Performance, 10, 145-156 .[CrossRef]
• Messick, D. M., & McClelland, C. L. (1983). Social traps and temporal traps . Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 9, 105-110 .[Abstract]
• Messick, D. M., & Schell, H. (1992). Evidence for an equality heuristic in social decision making . Acta Psychologica, 80, 311-323 .[CrossRef]
• Murnighan, J. K., Kim, J. W., & Metzger, A. R. (1993). The volunteer dilemma . Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 515-538 .[CrossRef][ISI]
• Okuguchi, K. (1984). Utility function, group size, and the aggregate provision of a pure public good . Public Choice, 42, 247-255 .[CrossRef]
• Olsen, R. A. (1997). Desirability bias among professional investment managers: Some evidence from experts . Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 10, 65-72 .[CrossRef]
• Olson, M. (1965). The logic of collective action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press .
• Pecorino, P. (1999). The effect of group size on public good provision in a repeated game setting . Journal of Public Economics, 72, 121-134 .[CrossRef]
• Rapoport, A., Budescu, D. V., & Suleiman, R. (1993). Sequential requests from randomly distributed shared resources . Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 37, 241-265 .[CrossRef]
• Rapoport, A., Budescu, D. V., Suleiman, R., & Weg, E. (1992). Social dilemmas with uniformly distributed resources. In W. B. G. Liebrand, D. M. Messick, & H. A. M. Wilke (Eds.), A social psychological approach to social dilemmas (pp. 41-55). Oxford: Pergamon Press .
• Roch, S. G., Lane, J. A. S., Samuelson, C. D., Allison, S. T., & Dent, J. L. (2000). Cognitive load and the equality heuristic: A two-stage model of resource overconsumption in small groups . Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 83, 185-212 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
• Samuelson, C. D., & Allison, S. T. (1994). Cognitive factors affecting the use of social decision heuristics in resource sharing tasks . Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 58, 1-27 .[CrossRef]
• Sandler, T., Sterbenz, F. P., & Posnett, J. (1987). Free riding and uncertainty . European Economic Review, 31, 1605-1617 .
• Sato, K. (1988). Trust and group size in a social dilemma . Japanese Psychological Research, 30, 88-93 .
• Schroeder, D. A., Sibicky, M. E., & Irwin M. E. (1995). A framework for understanding decisions in social dilemmas. In D. A. Schroeder (Ed.), Social dilemmas: Perspectives on individuals and groups (pp. 183-200). Westport, CT: Praeger .
• Stroebe, W., & Frey, B. S. (1982). Self-interest and collective action: The economics and psychology of public goods . British Journal of Social Psychology, 21, 121-137 .
• Suleiman, R., & Budescu, D. V. (1999). Common pool resource (CPR) dilemmas with incomplete information. In D. V. Budescu, I. Erev, & R. Zwick (Eds.), Games and human behavior: Essays in honor of Amnon Rapoport (pp. 387-410). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum .
• Taylor, M., & Ward, H. (1982). Chickens, whales, and lumpy goods: Alternative models of public good provision . Political Studies, 30, 350-370 .[CrossRef]
• Thaler, R. H. (1988). Anomalies: The ultimatum game . Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2, 195-206 .
• Van Dijk, E., & Wilke, H. (1995). Coordination rules in asymmetric social dilemmas: A comparison between public good dilemmas and resource dilemmas . Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 31, 1-27 .
• Van Dijk, E., & Wilke, H. (2000). Decision-induced focusing in social dilemmas: Give-some, keep- some, take-some, and leave-some dilemmas . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 92-104 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
• Van Dijk, E., Wilke, H., Wilke, M., & Metman, L. (1999). What information do we use in social dilemmas? Environmental uncertainty and the employment of coordination rules . Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 109-135 .[CrossRef][ISI]
• Van Dijk, E., Wit, A., Wilke, H., & Budescu, D. V. (2003). What we know (and do not know) about the effects of uncertainty on behavior in social dilemmas. In R. Suleiman, D. Budescu, I. Fischer, & D. Messick (Eds.), Contemporary psychological research on social dilemmas. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
• Van Lange, P. A. M., Liebrand, W. B. G., Messick, D. M., & Wilke, H. A. M. (1992). Introduction and literature review. In W. Liebrand, D. M. Messick, & H. Wilke (Eds.), Social dilemmas: Theoretical issues and research findings (pp. 3-28). Oxford: Pergamon .
• Weesie, J. (1994). Incomplete information and timing in the volunteer's dilemma: A comparison of four models . Journal of Conflict Resolution, 38, 557-585 .[Abstract]
• Weesie, J., & Franzen, A. (1998). Cost sharing in a volunteer's dilemma . Journal of Conflict Resolution, 42, 600-618 .[Abstract]
• Weinstein, N. D. (1980). Unrealistic optimism about future life events . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5, 806-820 .
• Wilke, H. A. M. (1992). Greed, efficiency and fairness in resource management situations. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 165-187). London: Wiley .
• Yamagishi, T. (1992). Group size and the provision of a sanctioning system in a social dilemma. In W. Liebrand, D. M. Messick, & H. Wilke (Eds.), Social dilemmas: Theoretical issues and research findings (pp. 267-287). Oxford: Pergamon .
• Zakay, D. (1983). The relationship between the probability assessor and the outcomes of an event as a determiner of subjective probability . Acta Psychologica, 53, 271-280 .[CrossRef]

CiteULike

Connotea

Del.icio.us

Digg

Reddit

Technorati

This article has been cited by other articles:

				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]

This Article Abstract Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Au, W. T. Articles by Ngai, M. Y. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?