IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v101y2020i7p2413-2436.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Democratic Competition for Rank, Cooperation, and Deception in Small Groups

Author

Listed:
  • Stephen Benard
  • Pat Barclay

Abstract

Objective Stratified groups face at least two obstacles in solving collective action problems and producing public goods. Individuals face temptation to free ride, and high‐ranking group members face incentives to protect their position at the group's expense. We introduce democratic competition for rank as a solution to the problem of cooperation in groups. We argue that democratic competition for high rank creates incentives for cooperation that are absent in nondemocratic groups. Methods In a small‐group behavioral experiment, we contrast groups in which individuals compete for a valuable high‐ranking position through democratic elections with groups in which individuals compete for high rank in resource‐based competitions. Groups faceda fluctuating external threat, and group members could invest resources in manipulating the apparent (but not actual) level of this threat. Results We find that democratic groups reward high contributors by electing them to the high‐ranking position at greater rates than low contributors. We also find evidence that individuals in democratic groups contribute more to the public good than individuals in nondemocratic groups. However, high‐ranking individuals in democratic groups exaggerate threats to the group at similar rates to high‐ranking individuals in nondemocratic groups. Conclusion The findings suggest that democratic competition increases public goods production and overall group efficiency, but does not eliminate—and may exacerbate—individuals' tendency to deceive their peers

Suggested Citation

  • Stephen Benard & Pat Barclay, 2020. "Democratic Competition for Rank, Cooperation, and Deception in Small Groups," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 101(7), pages 2413-2436, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:101:y:2020:i:7:p:2413-2436
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.12910
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12910
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.12910?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gavin J. Kilduff & Robb Willer & Cameron Anderson, 2016. "Hierarchy and Its Discontents: Status Disagreement Leads to Withdrawal of Contribution and Lower Group Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(2), pages 373-390, April.
    2. Pat Barclay & Stephen Benard, 2013. "Who Cries Wolf, and When? Manipulation of Perceived Threats to Preserve Rank in Cooperative Groups," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(9), pages 1-13, September.
    3. Wit, Arjaan & Wilke, Henk, 1988. "Subordinates' endorsement of an allocating leader in a commons dilemma: An equity theoretical approach," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 151-168, June.
    4. Guy Grossman & Delia Baldassarri, 2012. "The Impact of Elections on Cooperation: Evidence from a Lab‐in‐the‐Field Experiment in Uganda," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 56(4), pages 964-985, October.
    5. Kennedy, Jessica A. & Anderson, Cameron & Moore, Don A., 2013. "When overconfidence is revealed to others: Testing the status-enhancement theory of overconfidence," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 122(2), pages 266-279.
    6. Loch, Christoph & Yaziji, Michael & Langen, Christian, 2001. "The fight for the alpha position:: Channeling status competition in organizations," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 16-25, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Liu, Zhiqiang & Yan, Miao & Fan, Youqing & Chen, Liling, 2021. "Ascribed or achieved? The role of birth order on innovative behaviour in the workplace," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 480-492.
    2. Lyn M. Van Swol & Paul Hangsan Ahn & Andrew Prahl & Zhenxing Gong, 2021. "Language Use in Group Discourse and Its Relationship to Group Processes," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(1), pages 21582440211, March.
    3. Kahsay, Goytom Abraha & Medhin, Haileselassie, 2020. "Leader turnover and forest management outcomes: Micro-level evidence from Ethiopia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    4. Kray, Laura J. & Kennedy, Jessica A. & Van Zant, Alex B., 2014. "Not competent enough to know the difference? Gender stereotypes about women’s ease of being misled predict negotiator deception," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 125(2), pages 61-72.
    5. Youchung Kwon & Bo Kyung Kim, 2024. "When we unite, not divide: status homophily, group average status, and group performance in the Korean film industry," Asian Business & Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 23(1), pages 9-31, February.
    6. Sanjit Dhami & Emma Manifold & Ali al‐Nowaihi, 2021. "Identity and Redistribution: Theory and Evidence," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 88(350), pages 499-531, April.
    7. Kennedy, Jessica A. & Schweitzer, Maurice E., 2018. "Building trust by tearing others down: When accusing others of unethical behavior engenders trust," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 111-128.
    8. Marcin, Isabel & Robalo, Pedro & Tausch, Franziska, 2019. "Institutional endogeneity and third-party punishment in social dilemmas," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 243-264.
    9. Kim, Tami & Sezer, Ovul & Schroeder, Juliana & Risen, Jane & Gino, Francesca & Norton, Michael I., 2021. "Work group rituals enhance the meaning of work," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 197-212.
    10. Sausgruber, Rupert & Sonntag, Axel & Tyran, Jean-Robert, 2021. "Disincentives from redistribution: evidence on a dividend of democracy," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    11. Alventosa, Adriana & Antonioni, Alberto & Hernández, Penélope, 2021. "Pool punishment in public goods games: How do sanctioners’ incentives affect us?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 513-537.
    12. Chowdhury Mohammad Sakib Anwar & Alexander Matros & Sonali SenGupta, 2022. "Public Good Provision with a Distributor," Papers 2210.10642, arXiv.org.
    13. Zaggl, Michael A., 2017. "Manipulation of explicit reputation in innovation and knowledge exchange communities: The example of referencing in science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(5), pages 970-983.
    14. Johannes Brunzel, 2021. "Overconfidence and narcissism among the upper echelons: a systematic literature review," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 71(3), pages 585-623, July.
    15. Susana Peralta & João Pereira dos Santos, 2020. "Who seeks reelection: local fiscal restraints and political selection," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 184(1), pages 105-134, July.
    16. Chowdhury Mohammad Sakib Anwar & Alexander Matros & Sonali Sen Gupta, 2020. "Public Good Provision," Working Papers 300159332, Lancaster University Management School, Economics Department.
    17. Depoorter Ben & Holland Adam & Somerstein Elizabeth, 2009. "Copyright Abolition and Attribution," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 5(3), pages 1063-1080, December.
    18. Stefanie Gaebler & Felix Roesel, 2019. "Do direct elections matter? Quasi-experimental evidence from Germany," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 26(6), pages 1416-1445, December.
    19. Berman, Eli & Callen, Michael & Gibson, Clark C. & Long, James D. & Rezaee, Arman, 2019. "Election fairness and government legitimacy in Afghanistan," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 292-317.
    20. Parker, A. Rani & Coleman, Eric & Manyindo, Jacob & Mukuru, Emmanuel & Schultz, Bill, 2020. "Bridging the academic-practitioner gap in RCTs," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).

    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:bla:socsci:v:101:y:2020:i:7:p:2413-2436. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    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.