Abstract
In social dilemmas, where personal welfare is in conflict with collective welfare, there are inherent incentives to act non-cooperatively. Moreover, there is evidence that the example of a few uncooperative group members ("bad apples") is more influential than the example of comparable numbers of cooperative members (a bad apple effect). Two studies are reported that examine the functional relationship between the number of likely bad apples and individual cooperation, and whether and when the threat of social exclusion for uncooperative behavior may effectively counter the temptation to follow the example of such "bad apples". It is shown that (a) the threat of exclusion is sufficient to counter the temptation to follow a few bad apples' example, (b) such threats cannot, however, overcome the cooperation-degrading effects of large numbers (e.g., a majority) of bad apples, and (c) the effectiveness of such threats may be greater in relatively smaller groups. © 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 603-613 |
Journal | Journal of Experimental Social Psychology |
Volume | 45 |
Issue number | 4 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 2009 |
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'How many bad apples does it take to spoil the whole barrel? Social exclusion and toleration for bad apples'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Press/Media
-
When your boss is a bully or worse: What can you do? (Psychology Today)
Jaap W. Ouwerkerk
18/08/17
1 item of Media coverage
Press/Media: Research
-
Les collègues toxiques, cette nuisance du monde professionnel (Le Temps)
Jaap W. Ouwerkerk
9/02/16
1 item of Media coverage
Press/Media: Research
-
Was Banker verdorben macht (Stern)
Jaap W. Ouwerkerk
24/03/09
1 Media contribution
Press/Media: Research