IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/judgdm/v19y2024ip-_1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Intragroup communication in social dilemmas: An artefactual public good field experiment in small-scale communities

Author

Listed:
  • Hoenow, Nils Christian
  • Pourviseh, Adrian

Abstract

Communication is well-known to increase cooperation rates in social dilemma situations, but the exact mechanisms behind this remain largely unclear. This study examines the impact of communication on public good provisioning in an artefactual field experiment conducted with 216 villagers from small, rural communities in northern Namibia. In line with previous experimental findings, we observe a strong increase in cooperation when face-to-face communication is allowed before decision-making. We additionally introduce a condition in which participants cannot discuss the dilemma but talk to their group members about an unrelated topic prior to learning about the public good game. It turns out that this condition already leads to higher cooperation rates, albeit not as high as in the condition in which discussions about the social dilemma are possible. The setting in small communities also allows investigating the effects of pre-existing social relationships between group members and their interaction with communication. We find that both types of communication are primarily effective among socially more distant group members, which suggests that communication and social ties work as substitutes in increasing cooperation. Further analyses rule out better comprehension of the game and increased mutual expectations of one’s group members’ contributions as drivers for the communication effect. Finally, we discuss the role of personal and injunctive norms to keep commitments made during discussions.

Suggested Citation

  • Hoenow, Nils Christian & Pourviseh, Adrian, 2024. "Intragroup communication in social dilemmas: An artefactual public good field experiment in small-scale communities," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19, pages 1-1, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:judgdm:v:19:y:2024:i::p:-_1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1930297523000384/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:judgdm:v:19:y:2024:i::p:-_1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jdm .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.