Applying a logic of appropriateness to understand behavioral differences between common resource dilemmas and public good dilemmas

Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, vol. 35

Abstract

Abstract Common resource dilemmas (CRDs) and public good dilemmas (PGDs) are distinct types of social dilemmas, yet they model the same underlying conflict between the collective interest and one's self‐interest. Here, we study and interpret behavioral differences between these two main types of social dilemmas by applying a logic of appropriateness. In two experiments, we argue and demonstrate that CRDs, relative to PGDs, evoke higher levels of cooperation, because taking from collective property (in CRDs) is generally considered less appropriate than not giving from personal property (in PGDs). Importantly, these differential considerations of appropriateness are reflected not only in the willingness to cooperate but also in the willingness to punish and reward others' (non)cooperative behavior. Taken together, the findings reveal that CRDs and PGDs elicit different norms of appropriateness.

Authors 4

1. Welmer E. Molenmaker corresponding Aachen Social Economic and Organisational Psychology Unit Institute of Psychology Leiden University Leiden The Netherlands Institute of Psychology, Leiden University

   Leiden University

   Affiliation as printed

   Social, Economic and Organisational Psychology Unit, Institute of Psychology Leiden University Leiden The Netherlands

   Social, Economic and Organisational Psychology Unit, Institute of Psychology, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands

2. Gert‐Jan Lelieveld Aachen Social Economic and Organisational Psychology Unit Institute of Psychology Leiden University Leiden The Netherlands Institute of Psychology, Leiden University

   Leiden University

   Affiliation as printed

   Social, Economic and Organisational Psychology Unit, Institute of Psychology Leiden University Leiden The Netherlands

   Social, Economic and Organisational Psychology Unit, Institute of Psychology, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands

3. Erik W. de Kwaadsteniet Aachen Social Economic and Organisational Psychology Unit Institute of Psychology Leiden University Leiden The Netherlands Institute of Psychology, Leiden University

   Leiden University

   Affiliation as printed

   Social, Economic and Organisational Psychology Unit, Institute of Psychology Leiden University Leiden The Netherlands

   Social, Economic and Organisational Psychology Unit, Institute of Psychology, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands

4. Eric van Dijk Aachen Social Economic and Organisational Psychology Unit Institute of Psychology Leiden University Leiden The Netherlands Institute of Psychology, Leiden University

   Leiden University

   Affiliation as printed

   Social, Economic and Organisational Psychology Unit, Institute of Psychology Leiden University Leiden The Netherlands

   Social, Economic and Organisational Psychology Unit, Institute of Psychology, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands