We studied conflict resolution in two types of intergroup conflicts modeled as team games, a game of Assurance where the groups’ incentive to compete is purely fear, and a game of Chicken where the groups’ incentive to compete is purely greed. The games were operationalized as competitions between two groups with three players in each group. The players discussed the game with other ingroup members, after which they met with the members of the outgroup for a between group discussion, and finally had a within-group discussion before deciding individually whether to participate in their group’s collective effort vis-a-vis the other group. We found that all groups playing the Assurance game managed to achieve the collectively efficient outcome of zero participation, whereas groups playing the Chicken game maintained a highly inefficient participation rate of 78%. We conclude that communication between groups is very effective in bringing about a peaceful resolution if the conflict is motivated by mutual fear and practically useless if the conflict is motivated by mutual greed.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by Center for Rationality and Interactive Decision Theory, Hebrew University, Jerusalem in its series Discussion Paper Series with number
dp296.
Length: 26 pages Date of creation: Oct 2002 Date of revision: Publication status: Published in Journal of Conflict Resolution, 2003, vol. 46, pp. 326-339. Handle: RePEc:huj:dispap:dp296