IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v5y2015i2p2158244015593119.html

Abusing Good Intentions

Author

Listed:
  • Tamas Bereczkei
  • Zsolt Peter Szabo
  • Andrea Czibor

Abstract

The present study aims to understand how Machiavellians switch from one kind of response to another in different circumstances to maximize their profit. We set up a specific experimental paradigm that involved both a cooperative and competitive version of a public goods game. We found that Machiavellianism accounts for the total amount of money paid by the players ( N = 144) across five rounds in the cooperative but not in the competitive game. Compared with the others, individuals with higher scores on Mach scale contributed less to the public goods in the cooperative condition, but no difference was found in the competitive condition. Finally, this relationship was influenced by the sequence of the games. These results indicate that Machiavellians skillfully evaluate social environments and strive to exploit those with abundant contributions to public goods.

Suggested Citation

  • Tamas Bereczkei & Zsolt Peter Szabo & Andrea Czibor, 2015. "Abusing Good Intentions," SAGE Open, , vol. 5(2), pages 21582440155, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:5:y:2015:i:2:p:2158244015593119
    DOI: 10.1177/2158244015593119
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244015593119
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2158244015593119?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. Engel, Christoph & Rand, David G., 2014. "What does “clean” really mean? The implicit framing of decontextualized experiments," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 122(3), pages 386-389.
    2. Jeremy Cone & David G Rand, 2014. "Time Pressure Increases Cooperation in Competitively Framed Social Dilemmas," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(12), pages 1-13, December.
    3. Gunnthorsdottir, Anna & McCabe, Kevin & Smith, Vernon, 2002. "Using the Machiavellianism instrument to predict trustworthiness in a bargaining game," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 49-66, February.
    4. Ned Augenblick & Jesse M. Cunha, 2015. "Competition And Cooperation In A Public Goods Game: A Field Experiment," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 53(1), pages 574-588, January.
    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. David G Rand & Gordon Kraft-Todd & June Gruber, 2015. "The Collective Benefits of Feeling Good and Letting Go: Positive Emotion and (dis)Inhibition Interact to Predict Cooperative Behavior," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(1), pages 1-12, January.
    2. Matthias Pelster & Stefan Schaltegger, 2022. "The dark triad and corporate sustainability: An empirical analysis of personality traits of sustainability managers," Business Ethics, the Environment & Responsibility, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(1), pages 80-99, January.
    3. Huck, Steffen & Lünser, Gabriele & Spitzer, Florian & Tyran, Jean-Robert, 2016. "Medical insurance and free choice of physician shape patient overtreatment: A laboratory experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 131(PB), pages 78-105.
    4. Amanda Kvarven & Eirik Strømland & Conny Wollbrant & David Andersson & Magnus Johannesson & Gustav Tinghög & Daniel Västfjäll & Kristian Ove R. Myrseth, 2020. "The intuitive cooperation hypothesis revisited: a meta-analytic examination of effect size and between-study heterogeneity," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 6(1), pages 26-42, June.
    5. Mariela E Jaffé & Rainer Greifeneder & Marc-André Reinhard, 2019. "Manipulating the odds: The effects of Machiavellianism and construal level on cheating behavior," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(11), pages 1-22, November.
    6. Solnick, Sara J., 2007. "Cash and alternate methods of accounting in an experimental game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 316-321, February.
    7. Song, Fei, 2009. "Intergroup trust and reciprocity in strategic interactions: Effects of group decision-making mechanisms," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 164-173, January.
    8. Ronald S. Burt & Sonja Opper & Håkan J. Holm, 2022. "Cooperation Beyond the Network," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(2), pages 495-517, March.
    9. Ostermaier, Andreas, 2016. "Reciprocity and honesty in capital budgeting: Positive spill-over effects of reporting," VfS Annual Conference 2016 (Augsburg): Demographic Change 145904, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    10. Guo, H. & Jia, D. & Sendiña-Nadal, I. & Zhang, M. & Wang, Z. & Li, X. & Alfaro-Bittner, K. & Moreno, Y. & Boccaletti, S., 2021. "Evolutionary games on simplicial complexes," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    11. Fiedler, Susann & Hillenbrand, Adrian, 2020. "Gain-loss framing in interdependent choice," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 232-251.
    12. Fei Song & C. Bram Cadsby & Yunyun Bi, 2012. "Trust, Reciprocity, and Guanxi in China: An Experimental Investigation," Management and Organization Review, The International Association for Chinese Management Research, vol. 8(2), pages 397-421, July.
    13. Dilger, Alexander & Müller, Julia & Müller, Michael, 2017. "Is trustworthiness written on the face?," Discussion Papers of the Institute for Organisational Economics 2/2017, University of Münster, Institute for Organisational Economics.
    14. Martinsson, Peter & Villegas-Palacio, Clara, 2010. "Does disclosure crowd out cooperation?," Working Papers in Economics 446, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    15. Maria Eduarda Fernandes & Marieta Valente, 2018. "When Is Green Too Rosy? Evidence from a Laboratory Market Experiment on Green Goods and Externalities," Games, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-18, September.
    16. Valerio Capraro & David G. Rand, 2018. "Do the Right Thing: Experimental evidence that preferences for moral behavior, rather than equity or efficiency per se, drive human prosociality," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 13(1), pages 99-111, January.
    17. Masiliūnas, Aidas & Nax, Heinrich H., 2020. "Framing and repeated competition," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 604-619.
    18. Martin Kolmar & Andreas Wagener, 2019. "Group Identities in Conflicts," Homo Oeconomicus: Journal of Behavioral and Institutional Economics, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 165-192, December.
    19. Deck, Cary & Jahedi, Salar & Sheremeta, Roman, 2021. "On the consistency of cognitive load," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    20. Butler, Jeffrey V. & Fehr, Dietmar, 2024. "The causal effect of cultural identity on cooperation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 221(C), pages 134-147.

    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:sagope:v:5:y:2015:i:2:p:2158244015593119. 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: .

    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.