Trustworthiness and competitive altruism can also solve the ''tragedy of the commons''
By Pat Barclay. 2004
418 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Safety Research, Sociology and Political Science
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/1941cd1545f39c60b3456a2c5863c0039f00b084
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Cognitive Neuroscience
- Daniel Nettle
- Melissa Bateson
- Pat Barclay
- Daniel Balliet
- Junhui Wu
- N. Baumard
- M. van Vugt
- Isabel Thielmann
In Safety Research
- Pat Barclay
- P. V. van Lange
- Daniel Balliet
- Daniel Nettle
- Junhui Wu
- Melissa Bateson
- Benjamin E. Hilbig
- Dan Sperber
In Sociology and Political Science
- Pat Barclay
- Daniel Balliet
- P. V. van Lange
- Daniel Nettle
- Junhui Wu
- Benjamin E. Hilbig
- Melissa Bateson
- Eleanor A. Power
Citations in the corpus
- Charitable Giving as a Signal of Trustworthiness: Disentangling the Signaling Benefits of Altruistic Acts (2013, background): “Cox (2004) was the first to experimentally combine the dictator game (Forsythe, Horowitz, Savin, & Sefton, 1994) and the investment game (Berg, Dickhaut, & McCabe, 1995) to disentangle trustworthiness expectations from other motives behind trusters' decisions.”
- Communication and collective action: language and the evolution of human cooperation (2010, background): “Barclay, P., & Willer, R. (2007). Partner choice creates competitive altruism”
- The presence of others, prosocial traits, Machiavellianism: A personality × situation approach (2010, background): “For example, players had a higher probability of receiving money in a trust game if they had contributed in the previous Public Goods game (Barclay, 2004).”
- Groups Reward Individual Sacrifice: The Status Solution to the Collective Action Problem (2009, background): “Table 2 gives results of t-tests comparing how participants rated their partner’s group motivation and status depending on whether the partner was a high or low 6 Participants were given no feedback on their partner’s decisions after completing the economic exercises.”
- A Literature Review of Empirical Studies of Philanthropy (2010, neutral): “This is especially true when donations are announced in public or when they are directly observable (Alpizar et al., 2007; Barclay, 2004; Bateson, Nettle, & Roberts, 2006; Bereczkei, Birkas, & Kerekes, 2007; Harris, Benson, & Hall, 1975; Hoffman, McCabe, & Smith, 1996; Long, 1976; Satow, 1975; Soete”
- Naturally Green: Harnessing Stone Age Psychological Biases to Foster Environmental Behavior (2014, background): “Research shows that generous individuals are not only seen as more trustworthy (Barclay, 2004), but that they are also more desirable as friends and as romantic partners (Iredale, van Vugt, & Dunbar, 2008).”
- Public charity offer as a proximate factor of evolved reputation-building strategy: an experimental analysis of a real-life situation (2007, neutral): “For example, players are sometimes allowed to trust only one person, which is different from real-life circumstances where people can form multiple partnerships (Barclay, 2004).”
- The Psychology of Charitable Donations to Disaster Victims and Beyond (2015, background): “…reputation (Clark, 2002), that they prefer giving money physically in person rather than anonymously (Hoffman, McCabe, & Smith, 1996), and that not giving is seen as affecting one’s reputation negatively (e.g., Barclay, 2004; Bateson, Nettle, & Roberts, 2006; Bereczkei, Birkas, & Kerekes, 2007).”
- Altruism toward in-group members as a reputation mechanism (2010, background): “In other studies, participants were found to behave in a more altruistic manner when they expected that their reputation would spread to other participants (Barclay, 2004; Barclay & Willer, 2007; Milinski, Semmann, & Krambeck, 2002).”
- Nobody's watching? Subtle cues affect generosity in an anonymous economic game. (2005, background): “…forms of prosocial behavior can be sustained when players are given information about one another's choices in past rounds, assuming that there are opportunities to respond to that information in the game context (Barclay, 2004; Fehr & Gächter, 2000; Milinski, Semmann, & Krambeck, 2002a, 2002b).”
- Moral Reputation: An Evolutionary and Cognitive Perspective (2012, background): “…level, or that ‘moral’ dispositions have been selected at the individual level and are actually 3 Similar claims are made by (Andreoni & Petrie, 2004; Barclay, 2004; Bereczkei, Birkas, & Kerekes, 2007; Bourrat, Baumard, & McKay, 2011; Burnham, 2003; Burnham & Hare, 2007; Ernest-Jones, Nettle, &…”
- Prosocial signaling and cooperation among Martu hunters (2015, background): “…is in part maintained by strong links between generosity and cooperation, generated through the honest signaling of one's intrinsic quality (Barclay, 2004, 2013; Boone, 1998; Gintis, Smith, & Bowles, 2001; Lotem, Fishman, & Stone, 2003; Macfarlan, Quinlan, & Remiker, 2013; Panchanathan &…”
- Saving Power to Conserve Your Reputation? The Effectiveness of Private versus Public Information (2012, positive): “Psychologists find that a prosocial reputation is valuable, allowing consumers to obtain a number of non-market goods such as trust (Barclay, 2004), friends, allies, romantic partners (Griskevicius et al., 2007; Miller, 2009) and leadership 6 Petersen et al. (2007) induced dramatic savings of 30…”
- Prosocial behavior increases perceptions of meaning in life (2017, background): “This reputational mechanism is thought to underlie a substantial portion of the incentive for prosocial behavior in general (Barclay, 2004; Nowak & Sigmund, 2005; Rockenbach & Milinski, 2006).”