IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jocore/v49y2005i6p895-907.html

Approval Voting and Parochialism

Author

Listed:
  • Jonathan Baron

    (Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania)

  • Nicole Y. Altman

    (Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania)

  • Stephan Kroll

    (Department of Economics, California State University at Sacramento)

Abstract

In hypothetical scenarios involving two groups (nations or groups of workers), subjects voted on three proposals: one helped group A (their group), one helped B, and one helped both groups, more than the average of the first two but less than their maximum. When subjects voted for one proposal, most voted for the one that helped group A. This result is “parochial†because it helps the voter’s own group even though it hurts the other group more. When voters could approve two proposals, they tended to approve the third proposal as well, and it was more likely to win. Approval voting can thus reduce the effect of parochialism, a bias toward one’s own group, on election outcomes. In a second experiment, the authors replicated this effect using real-money payoffs.

Suggested Citation

  • Jonathan Baron & Nicole Y. Altman & Stephan Kroll, 2005. "Approval Voting and Parochialism," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 49(6), pages 895-907, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jocore:v:49:y:2005:i:6:p:895-907
    DOI: 10.1177/0022002705281152
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0022002705281152
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0022002705281152?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. Peregrine Schwartz-Shea & Randy T. Simmons, 1991. "Egoism, Parochialism, and Universalism," Rationality and Society, , vol. 3(1), pages 106-132, January.
    2. Robert J. Weber, 1995. "Approval Voting," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(1), pages 39-49, Winter.
    3. Dawes, Robyn M. & Orbell, John M. & Simmons, Randy T. & Van De Kragt, Alphons J. C., 1986. "Organizing Groups for Collective Action," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 80(4), pages 1171-1185, December.
    4. Schwartz-Shea, Peregrine & Simmons, Randy T, 1990. "The Layered Prisoners' Dilemma: Ingroup versus Macro-efficiency," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 65(1), pages 61-83, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Menezes, Mozart B.C. & da Silveira, Giovani J.C. & Drezner, Zvi, 2016. "Democratic elections and centralized decisions: Condorcet and Approval Voting compared with Median and Coverage locations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 253(1), pages 195-203.
    2. Granić, Đura-Georg, 2017. "The problem of the divided majority: Preference aggregation under uncertainty," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 21-38.

    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. Polzer, Jeffrey T. & Stewart, Katherine J. & Simmons, Jessica L., 1999. "A Social Categorization Explanation for Framing Effects in Nested Social Dilemmas, , ," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 79(2), pages 154-178, August.
    2. Delaney, Jason & Jacobson, Sarah, 2014. "Those outsiders: How downstream externalities affect public good provision," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 67(3), pages 340-352.
    3. Jonathan Baron, 2012. "The ‘culture of honor’ in citizens’ concepts of their duty as voters," Rationality and Society, , vol. 24(1), pages 37-72, February.
    4. Jonathan Baron, 2001. "Confusion of Group Interest and Self-Interest in Parochial Cooperation on Behalf of a Group," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 45(3), pages 283-296, June.
    5. Le Breton, Michel & Lepelley, Dominique & Smaoui, Hatem, 2012. "The Probability of Casting a Decisive Vote: From IC to IAC trhough Ehrhart's Polynomials and Strong Mixing," IDEI Working Papers 722, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.
    6. Baron, Jonathan & Kemp, Simon, 2004. "Support for trade restrictions, attitudes, and understanding of comparative advantage," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 565-580, October.
    7. Laurent Bouton & Micael Castanheira, 2012. "One Person, Many Votes: Divided Majority and Information Aggregation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 80(1), pages 43-87, January.
    8. Donald P. Green & Alan S. Gerber, 2003. "The Underprovision of Experiments in Political Science," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 589(1), pages 94-112, September.
    9. Gaechter, S. & Mengel, F. & Tsakas, E. & Vostroknutov, A., 2013. "Growth and inequality in public good games," Research Memorandum 070, Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).
    10. Edward Cartwright & Anna Stepanova, 2017. "Efficiency in a forced contribution threshold public good game," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 46(4), pages 1163-1191, November.
    11. Glenn Bush & Nick Hanley & Mirko Moro & Daniel Rondeau, 2013. "Measuring the Local Costs of Conservation: A Provision Point Mechanism for Eliciting Willingness to Accept Compensation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 89(3), pages 490-513.
    12. İriş, Doruk & Lee, Jungmin & Tavoni, Alessandro, "undated". "Delegation and Public Pressure in a Threshold Public Goods Game: Theory and Experimental Evidence," ETA: Economic Theory and Applications 234307, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    13. Craig D. Parks & Lorne G. Hulbert, 1995. "High And Low Trusters' Responses To Fear in a Payoff Matrix," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 39(4), pages 718-730, December.
    14. Bo Chen & Rajat Deb, 2018. "The role of aggregate information in a binary threshold game," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 51(3), pages 381-414, October.
    15. Haan, Marco & Kooreman, Peter, 2002. "Free riding and the provision of candy bars," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(2), pages 277-291, February.
    16. James Andreoni & Laura Gee, 2015. "Gunning for efficiency with third party enforcement in threshold public goods," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(1), pages 154-171, March.
    17. Ginsburgh, Victor & Zang, Israël, 2012. "Shapley Ranking of Wines," Journal of Wine Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(2), pages 169-180, November.
    18. Marks, Melanie & Croson, Rachel, 1998. "Alternative rebate rules in the provision of a threshold public good: An experimental investigation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 195-220, February.
    19. Mohsen Mosleh & Alexander J. Stewart & Joshua B. Plotkin & David G. Rand, 2020. "Prosociality in the economic Dictator Game is associated with less parochialism and greater willingness to vote for intergroup compromise," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(1), pages 1-6, January.
    20. McEvoy, David M. & Cherry, Todd L. & Stranlund, John K., "undated". "The Endogenous Formation of Coalitions to Provide Public Goods: Theory and Experimental Evidence," Working Paper Series 102265, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Department of Resource Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:sae:jocore:v:49:y:2005:i:6:p:895-907. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://pss.la.psu.edu/ .

    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.