Self-serving incentives impair collective decisions by increasing conformity

The average judgment of large numbers of people has been found to be consistently better than the best individual response. But what motivates individuals when they make collective decisions? While it is a popular belief that individual incentives promote out-of-thebox thinking and diverse solutions, the exact role of motivation and reward in collective intelligence remains unclear. Here we examined collective intelligence in an interactive group estimation task where participants were rewarded for their individual or group's performance. In addition to examining individual versus collective incentive structures, we controlled whether participants could see social information about the others' responses. We found that knowledge about others' responses reduced the wisdom of the crowd and, crucially, this effect depended on how people were rewarded. When rewarded for the accuracy of their individual responses, participants converged to the group mean, increasing social conformity, reducing diversity and thereby diminishing their group wisdom. When rewarded for their collective performance, diversity of opinions and the group wisdom increased. We conclude that the intuitive association between individual incentives and individualist opinion needs revising

El escarpado camino hacia la legislación social: debates, contradicciones y crucijadas en el movimiento obrero y popular (Chile: 1901-1924).

<p>A. Overlayed time series for synchrony and enjoyment (top panel) and synchrony and heart rate (bottom panel). B: GC for synchrony and enjoyment. C. GC for synchrony and heart rate. The dashed line indicates a significance level of <i>p</i> < .05.</p

A large-scale test of the link between intergroup contact and support for social change

Guided by the early findings of social scientists, practitioners have long advocated for greater contact between groups to reduce prejudice and increase social cohesion. Recent work, however, suggests that intergroup contact can undermine support for social change towards greater equality, especially among disadvantaged group members. Using a large and heterogeneous dataset (12,997 individuals from 69 countries), we demonstrate that intergroup contact and support for social change towards greater equality are positively associated among members of advantaged groups (ethnic majorities and cis-heterosexuals) but negatively associated among disadvantaged groups (ethnic minorities and sexual and gender minorities). Specification-curve analysis revealed important variation in the size—and at times, direction—of correlations, depending on how contact and support for social change were measured. This allowed us to identify one type of support for change—willingness to work in solidarity— that is positively associated with intergroup contact among both advantaged and disadvantaged group members

Need satisfaction in intergroup contact:A multinational study of pathways toward social change

none43siFinanziamenti esterni a vari co-autoriWhat role does intergroup contact play in promoting support for social change toward greater social equality? Drawing on the needs-based model of reconciliation, we theorized that when inequality between groups is perceived as illegitimate, disadvantaged group members will experience a need for empowerment and advantaged group members a need for acceptance. When intergroup contact satisfies each group's needs, it should result in more mutual support for social change. Using four sets of survey data collected through the Zurich Intergroup Project in 23 countries, we tested several preregistered predictions, derived from the above reasoning, across a large variety of operationalizations. Two studies of disadvantaged groups (Ns = 689 ethnic minority members in Study 1 and 3,382 sexual/gender minorities in Study 2) support the hypothesis that, after accounting for the effects of intergroup contact and perceived illegitimacy, satisfying the need for empowerment (but not acceptance) during contact is positively related to support for social change. Two studies with advantaged groups (Ns = 2,937 ethnic majority members in Study 3 and 4,203 cis-heterosexual individuals in Study 4) showed that, after accounting for illegitimacy and intergroup contact, satisfying the need for acceptance (but also empowerment) is positively related to support for social change. Overall, findings suggest that intergroup contact is compatible with efforts to promote social change when group-specific needs are met. Thus, to encourage support for social change among both disadvantaged and advantaged group members, it is essential that, besides promoting mutual acceptance, intergroup contact interventions also give voice to and empower members of disadvantaged groups.mixedHässler, Tabea; Ullrich, Johannes; Sebben, Simone; Shnabel, Nurit; Bernardino, Michelle; Valdenegro, Daniel; Van Laar, Colette; González, Roberto; Visintin, Emilio Paolo; Tropp, Linda R; Ditlmann, Ruth K; Abrams, Dominic; Aydin, Anna Lisa; Pereira, Adrienne; Selvanathan, Hema Preya; von Zimmermann, Jorina; Lantos, Nóra Anna; Sainz, Mario; Glenz, Andreas; Kende, Anna; Oberpfalzerová, Hana; Bilewicz, Michal; Branković, Marija; Noor, Masi; Pasek, Michael H; Wright, Stephen C; Žeželj, Iris; Kuzawinska, Olga; Maloku, Edona; Otten, Sabine; Gul, Pelin; Bareket, Orly; Corkalo Biruski, Dinka; Mugnol-Ugarte, Luiza; Osin, Evgeny; Baiocco, Roberto; Cook, Jonathan E; Dawood, Maneeza; Droogendyk, Lisa; Loyo, Angélica Herrera; Jelić, Margareta; Kelmendi, Kaltrina; Pistella, JessicaHässler, Tabea; Ullrich, Johannes; Sebben, Simone; Shnabel, Nurit; Bernardino, Michelle; Valdenegro, Daniel; Van Laar, Colette; González, Roberto; Visintin, Emilio Paolo; Tropp, Linda R; Ditlmann, Ruth K; Abrams, Dominic; Aydin, Anna Lisa; Pereira, Adrienne; Selvanathan, Hema Preya; von Zimmermann, Jorina; Lantos, Nóra Anna; Sainz, Mario; Glenz, Andreas; Kende, Anna; Oberpfalzerová, Hana; Bilewicz, Michal; Branković, Marija; Noor, Masi; Pasek, Michael H; Wright, Stephen C; Žeželj, Iris; Kuzawinska, Olga; Maloku, Edona; Otten, Sabine; Gul, Pelin; Bareket, Orly; Corkalo Biruski, Dinka; Mugnol-Ugarte, Luiza; Osin, Evgeny; Baiocco, Roberto; Cook, Jonathan E; Dawood, Maneeza; Droogendyk, Lisa; Loyo, Angélica Herrera; Jelić, Margareta; Kelmendi, Kaltrina; Pistella, Jessic

Joint action aesthetics

Synchronized movement is a ubiquitous feature of dance and music performance. Much research into the evolutionary origins of these cultural practices has focused on why humans perform rather than watch or listen to dance and music. In this study, we show that movement synchrony among a group of performers predicts the aesthetic appreciation of live dance performances. We developed a choreography that continuously manipulated group synchronization using a defined movement vocabulary based on arm swinging, walking and running. The choreography was performed live to four audiences, as we continuously tracked the performers’ movements, and the spectators’ affective responses. We computed dynamic synchrony among performers using cross recurrence analysis of data from wrist accelerometers, and implicit measures of arousal from spectators’ heart rates. Additionally, a subset of spectators provided continuous ratings of enjoyment and perceived synchrony using tablet computers. Granger causality analyses demonstrate predictive relationships between synchrony, enjoyment ratings and spectator arousal, if audiences form a collectively consistent positive or negative aesthetic evaluation. Controlling for the influence of overall movement acceleration and visual change, we show that dance communicates group coordination via coupled movement dynamics among a group of performers. Our findings are in line with an evolutionary function of dance–and perhaps all performing arts–in transmitting social signals between groups of people. Human movement is the common denominator of dance, music and theatre. Acknowledging the time-sensitive and immediate nature of the performer-spectator relationship, our study makes a significant step towards an aesthetics of joint actions in the performing arts

The Mechanics of Group Cohesion

Human history is inherently social and the study of groups is fundamental for understanding what it means to be human. Why do we form groups? How do we make sure that groups remain cohesive social entities and do not fall apart? It is the central aim of this thesis to explore the relationship between individuals and groups with a focus on the mechanisms which produce group cohesion. Researchers from different disciplines agree that studying group cohesion is paramount for understanding group dynamics. Here, group cohesion is not approached in relation to its structural properties, but the focus is directed towards its affective and social components. One of the premises is that cohesion plays a crucial role in the process of group formation. While group cohesion is often discussed in relation to social identity and other higher order cognitive processes, findings from the behavioural coordination literature suggest that there is also a physical dimension to group cohesion. Synchronous actions experienced between pairs or small groups of people have been reported to have pro-social consequences, such as increased liking or cooperation, and to create feelings of unity and similarity between people. However, to this date not many researchers have analysed the role of behavioural coordination or synchrony for the emergence and maintenance of cohesion in larger groups. This thesis aims to contribute to a now growing field, looking at this relationship. Novel data is presented, which shows that synchronous behaviour can have positive effects on levels of intragroup affiliation and unity. Group synchrony is portrayed as an important mechanism, which can enhance and signal cohesion in groups. The positive and negative social consequences of group cohesion are discussed and a novel and innovative research paradigm is presented, which has been developed to aid with the scientific investigation of intra- and intergroup dynamics

Verbal Synchrony in Large Groups

Metronomes, cells, neurons, fireflies, and human beings all fall into synchrony with each other, given the opportunity. Synchrony between people appears to generate social cohesion by increasing liking and feelings of togetherness. But the function of dancing, chanting and singing is not just to produce warm, affiliative feelings, anthropologists have speculated, but also to improve group action. The group that chants and dances together hunts well together. Direct evidence for this is sparse, as research so far has mainly focused on studies of pairs, the effects of bodily movement, and measured cooperation and affiliative decisions. In contrast, in our experiment, large groups of people were studied, the synchrony of their verbal behaviour alone was manipulated, and in addition to affiliation, we measured their performance on a memory task and on a group action task, playing a video game together. Our evidence suggests that the effects of synchrony are stable across modalities, and can be generalized to larger group

Moving together: in the body or the mind?

When people move together, as they dance, march or flirt, itincreases affiliation between them. But what about ‘movingtogether’ produces affiliation: the movements themselves, orthe social context of moving ‘together’? We instructed pairs ofparticipants to listen to music and move their arms or legsaccording to shapes appearing on screen. They either carriedout the same movements, or when one moved their arms theother moved their legs. They either saw shapes on one laptop,or each had their own laptop. Surprisingly, participants did notlike each other more if they carried out the same movements,but affiliation did increase if they danced looking at the samescreen. Rather than their movements, instructions, intentionsor perceptual experiences, here it is the social context of theactions that produces affiliation, a surprising finding that is noteasily accounted for by the dominant theories of mimicry andbehavioural synchrony

We predict a riot: inequity, relative deprivation and collective destruction in the laboratory

International audienceRiots are unpredictable and dangerous. Our understanding of the factors that cause riots is based on correlational observations of population data, or post hoc introspection of individuals. To complement these accounts, we developed innovative experimental techniques, investigated the psychological factors of rioting and explored their consequences with agent-based simulations. We created a game, ‘Parklife’, that physically co-present participants played using smartphones. In two teams, participants tapped on their screen to grow trees and flowerbeds on separate but adjacent virtual parks. Participants could also tap to vandalize the other team's park. In some conditions, we surreptitiously introduced inequity between the teams so that one (the disadvantaged team) had to tap more for each reward. The experience of inequity caused the disadvantaged team to engage in more destruction, and to report higher relative deprivation and frustration. Agent-based models suggested that acts of destruction were driven by the interaction between individual level of frustration and the team's behaviour. Our results provide insights into the psychological mechanisms underlying collective action

We predict a riot: inequality, relative deprivation and collective destruction in the lab

In a riot, people damage the environment of themselves and others. Due to the difficulties of measuring violent behaviour, the roles of factors thought to lead to rioting are hard to discern. We investigated the psychological roots of rioting using innovative experimental techniques. We created a game, ‘Parklife’, that co-present participants played using smartphones. In two teams, participants tapped on their screens to grow trees and flowerbeds on separate but adjacent virtual parks. Participants could also tap to vandalize the other team’s park. In some conditions, we surreptitiously introduced inequality between the teams so that disadvantaged teams had to tap more for each reward. The experience of inequality caused disadvantaged teams to engage in more destruction, and to report higher relative deprivation and frustration. Our lab-based experiment provides direct insight into the psychological mechanisms underlying collective violence, and supports previous observations that relative deprivation plays a role in riots