The Generality of the Individual-Group Discontinuity Effect: Variations in Positivity-Negativity of Outcomes,Players' Relative Power,and Magnitude of Outcomes
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online December, 1991
The Generality of the Individual-Group Discontinuity Effect: Variations in Positivity-Negativity of Outcomes,Players' Relative Power,and Magnitude of Outcomes
In a series of previous studies the authors have shown that intergroup interactions are dramatically more competitive and less cooperative than individual interactions. This phenomenon has been termed a discontinuity effect. The basic paradigm in this research measures competition and cooperation by choices made in a prisoner's dilemma game (PDG). Although a discontinuity effect has been observed in six separate studies, these have typically used a standard format. The present three studies extend the reliability and generality of the discontinuity effect by varying, respectively, the positivity-negativity of the outcomes in the PDG matrix, the power position of the players, and the magnitude of the PDG payoff values. In each of the three studies a statistically significant discontinuity effect was observed. The meaning of these studies is discussed, along with an unexpected interaction effect among gender, matrix type, and item sequence in the second study.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Allport, F. H. (1924). Social psychology. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
2.
Brewer, M. B. , & Campbell, D. T. (1976). Ethnocentrism and intergroup attitudes: East African evidence. New York: Halstead Press.
3.
Cohen, W. L. (1977). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (rev. ed.). Orlando, FL-Academic Press.
4.
Diener, E. (1976). Effects of prior destructive behavior, anonymity, and group presence on deindividuation and aggression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33, 497-507.
5.
Freud, S. (1960). Group psychology and the analysis of the ego (J. Strachey, Trans.). New York: Bantam Books. (Original work published 1922)
6.
Hays, W. L. (1981). Statistics (3rd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and 'Winston.
7.
Hoyle, R. H. , Pinkley, R. L., & Insko, C. A. (1989). Perceptions of behavior: Evidence of differing expectations for interpersonal and intergroup interactions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin15, 365-376.
8.
Insko, C. A. , Gilmore, R., Drenan, S., Lipsitz, A., Moehle, D., & Thibaut, J. (1983). Trade versus expropriation in open groups: A comparison of two types of social power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 977-999.
9.
Insko, C. A. , Hoyle, R. H., Pinkley, R L., Hong, G., Slim, R., Dalton, G., Lin, Y., Ruffin, P. P., Dardis, G. J., Bernthal, P. R., & Schopler, J. (1988). Individual-group discontinuity: The role of a consensus rule. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 153-174.
10.
Insko, C. A. , Pinkley, R L., Harring, K., Holton, B., Hong, G., Krams, D. S., Hoyle, R. H., & Thibaut, J. (1987). Beyond categorization to competition: Expectations of appropriate behavior. Representative Research in Social Psychology, 7, 5-36.
11.
Insko, C. A. , Pinkley, R. L., Hoyle, R. H., Dalton, B., Hong, G., Slim, R., Landry, P., Holton, B., Ruffin, P. F., & Thibaut, J. (1987). Individual-group discontinuity: The role of intergroup contact. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 23, 250-267.
12.
Insko, C. A. , Schopler, J., Hoyle, R. H., Dardis, G. J., & Graetz, K. A. (1990). Individual-group discontinuity as a function of fear and greed. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 68-79.
13.
Kelley, H. H. , & Thibaut, J. W. (1978). Interpersonal relationsNew York: Wiley.
14.
Komorita, S. S. (1987). Cooperative choice in decomposed social dilemmas. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 13, 53-63.
15.
Komorita, S. S. , & Lapworth, C. W. (1982). Cooperative choice among individuals versus groups in an N-person dilemma situation. Journal of Personalty and Social Psychology, 42, 487-496.
16.
LeBon, G. (1895). Psychologie des foules. Translated, The Crowd. London: Unwin.
17.
Lindskold, S. , McElwain, D. C., & Wayner, M. (1977). Cooperation and the use of coercion by groups and individuals. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 21, 521-550.
18.
Mathes, E. W. , & Kahn, A. (1975). Diffusion of responsibility and extreme behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 881-886.
19.
McCallum, D. M. , Harring, K., Gilmore, R., Drenan, S., Chase j., Insko, C. A., & Thibaut, J. (1985). Competition between groups and between individuals. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 21, 301-320.
20.
McDougall, W. (1920). The group mind. New York: Putnam.
21.
O'Brien, R. G. , & Lohr, V. I. (1984). Power analysis for linear models: The time has come. In Proceedings of the Ninth Annual SAS Users Group International Conference. Cary, NC: SAS Institute.
22.
Pruitt, D. (1967). Reward structure and cooperation: The decomposed prisoner's dilemma game. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 7,21-27.
23.
Pylyshyn, Z. , Agnew, N., & Illingworth, J. (1966). Comparison of individuals and pairs as participants in a mixed-motive game. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 10, 211-220.
24.
Schopler, J. , Insko, C. A., Graetz, K A., Drigotas, S., Smith, V. A., & Dahl, K. (1990). Individual group discontinuity: Further evidence for mediation by fear and green Manuscript submitted for publication.
25.
Shaw, C. (1932). A comparison of individuals and small groups in the rational solution of complex problems. American Journal of Psychology, 54, 491-504.
26.
Tajfel, H. (1978). Social categorization, social identity and social comparison. In H. Tajfel (Ed.) ,Differentiation between social groups. London: Academic Press.
27.
Triplett, N. (1897). The dynamogenic factors in pacemaking and competition. American Journal of Psychology, 9, 507-533.
28.
Wolosin, RJ. , Sherman, S. J., & Mynatt, C. R. (1975). When self-interest and altruism conflict. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 752-760.
