Gossip vs Punishment: The Efficiency of Reputation to Promote and Maintain Cooperation

Prior theory suggests that reputation spreading (e.g., gossip) and punishment are two key mechanisms to promote cooperation in groups, but no behavioral research has yet examined their relative effectiveness and efficiency in promoting and maintaining cooperation. 

To examine these issues, we observed participants interacting in a four-round public goods game (PGG) with or without gossip and punishment options, and a subsequent two-round trust game (TG). We manipulated gossip as the option to send notes about other group members to these members' future partners, and punishment as the option to assign deduction points to reduce other group members' outcomes with a fee-to-fine ratio of 1:3. 

Findings revealed that in the four-round PGG, the option to gossip increased both cooperation and individual earnings, whereas the option to punish had no overall effect on cooperation (but a positive effect on cooperation in the last two rounds of the PGG) and significantly decreased individual earnings. Importantly, the initial option to gossip made people more trusting and trustworthy in the subsequent TG when gossip was no longer possible, compared to the no-gossip condition. 

Thus, we provide some initial evidence that gossip may be more effective and efficient than punishment to promote and maintain cooperation.

Below:  Relative effectiveness and efficiency of gossip and punishment in promoting and maintaining cooperation.

(a) Average contribution and (b) total earnings in the PGG, (c) trust, and (d) trustworthiness in the TG as a function of gossip and punishment manipulations. C = control condition with no gossip or punishment, P = punishment condition, G = gossip condition, GP = gossip-and-punishment condition. Error bars indicate standard errors of the mean.

Full article at:   http://goo.gl/s3w3PJ

By:  Wu J1, Balliet D1, Van Lange PA1.

• 1Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Experimental and Applied Psychology, Van der Boechorststraat 1, 1081 BT Amsterdam, the Netherlands. 
• Sci Rep. 2016 Apr 4;6:23919. doi: 10.1038/srep23919.

More at:  https://twitter.com/hiv insight

And: http://twitter.com/Prison Health

The Whitewashing Effect: Using Racial Contact to Signal Trustworthiness and Competence

The present research examines whether people use racial contact to signal positive and negative social attributes. 

In two experiments, participants were instructed to fake good (trustworthy/competent) or fake bad (untrustworthy/incompetent) when reporting their amount of contact with a range of different racial groups. In Experiment 1 (N = 364), participants faking good reported significantly more contact with White Americans than with non-White Americans, whereas participants faking bad did not. In Experiment 2 (N= 1,056), this pattern was replicated and was found to be particularly pronounced among those with stronger pro-White bias. 

These findings suggest that individuals may use racial contact as a social signal, effectively “whitewashing” their apparent contact and friendships when trying to present positively.

Purchase full article at:   http://goo.gl/NYQM02

By:  

Stephen T. La Macchia1⇑

Winnifred R. Louis1

Matthew J. Hornsey1

Michael Thai1

Fiona Kate Barlow1,2

¹The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia

²Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia

Stephen La Macchia, School of Psychology, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, St Lucia, Queensland 4072, Australia. Email: s.lamacchia@uq.edu.au

More at:  https://twitter.com/hiv insight

And: http://twitter.com/Prison Health

Judged and Remembered Trustworthiness of Faces Is Enhanced by Experiencing Multisensory Synchrony and Asynchrony in the Right Order

This work builds on the enfacement effect. This effect occurs when experiencing a rhythmic stimulation on one’s cheek while seeing someone else’s face being touched in a synchronous way. This typically leads to cognitive and social-cognitive effects similar to self-other merging. In two studies, we demonstrate that this multisensory stimulation can change the evaluation of the other’s face. 

In the first study, participants judged the stranger’s face and similar faces as being more trustworthy after synchrony, but not after asynchrony. Synchrony interacted with the order of the stroking; hence trustworthiness only changed when the synchronous stimulation occurred before the asynchronous one. 

In the second study, a synchronous stimulation caused participants to remember the stranger’s face as more trustworthy, but again only when the synchronous stimulation came before the asynchronous one. 

The results of both studies show that order of stroking creates a context in which multisensory synchrony can affect the trustworthiness of faces.

Below:  Examples of the faces judged in Study 1 (consent from the person depicted in Fig 1 A was obtained for publication of these images) A) Computerized version of the stranger’s face; B) 35% morph of the stranger’s face; C) 20% morph of the stranger’s face; D) filler face.

Below:  Example of the Faces and Morphs used in Study 2 (consent from the person depicted was obtained for publication of these images)

Full article at:  http://goo.gl/zBPVU7

By:   

Hugo Toscano, Thomas W. Schubert

Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL), Centro de Investigação e Intervenção Social, Lisboa, Portugal

Thomas W. Schubert

Department of Psychology, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway 

More at:  https://twitter.com/hiv insight

And: http://twitter.com/Prison Health