Skip to main content

Part of the book series: Springer-Lehrbuch ((SLB))

  • 31k Accesses

Zusammenfassung

Stellen Sie sich vor, Sie müssten für eines Ihrer Seminare bei einer Gruppenarbeit mitwirken. Der Arbeitsauftrag widerstrebt Ihnen, da Sie sehr im Stress sind und nicht wissen, wie Sie das zeitlich noch schaffen könnten. Ihr vorrangiges Interesse besteht darin, möglichst wenig Zeit in die Arbeit zu investieren.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 29.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Weiterführende Literatur

  • Binmore, K. G. (2007). Game theory: A very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Komorita, S. S. & Parks, C. D. (1996). Social dilemmas. Boulder: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poundstone, W. (1993). Prisoner’s dilemma. New York: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shultz, C. J. & Holbrook, M. B. (1999). Marketing and the tragedy of the commons: A synthesis, commentary, and analysis for action. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 18, 218–229.

    Google Scholar 

Literatur

  • Acevedo, M. & Krueger, J. I. (2004). Two egocentric sources of the decision to vote: The voter’s illusion and the belief in personal relevance. Political Psychology, 25, 115–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aldrich, J. H. (1993). Rational choice and turnout. American Journal of Political Science, 37, 246–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andreoni, J. (1988). Why free ride? Journal of Public Economics, 37, 291–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baron, J. (2000). Thinking and deciding (3rd edition). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernoulli, D. (1738/1896).Versuch einer neuen Theorie der Wertbestimmung on Glücksfällen. Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawes R. M. (1980). Social dilemmas. Annual Reviews of Psychology, 31, 169–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawes, R. M., McTavish, J. & Shaklee, H. (1977). Behavior, communication, and assumptions about other people’s behavior in a commons dilemma situation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawkins, R. (1976). The selfish gene. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, J. (2005). Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed. New York: Viking.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diekmann, A. (1985). Volunteer’s dilemma. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 29, 605–610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenberg, N. & Miller, P. A. (1987). The relation between empathy and prosocial and related behaviors. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 91–119.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Epley, N., Caruso, E. M. & Bazerman, M. H. (2006). When perspective taking increases taking: Reactive egoism in social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 872–889.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Falk, A. & Fischbacher, U. (2006). A theory of reciprocity. Games and Economic Behavior, 54, 293–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fehr, E. & Gächter, S. (2002). Altruistic puishment in humans. Nature, 415, 137–140.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Flood, M. & Drescher, M. (1952). Some experimental games. Research memorandum RM–789. Santa Monica: Rand.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guyer, M. J. & Rapoport, A. (1966). A taxonomy of 2 x 2 games. General Systems, 11, 203–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the commons. Science, 162, 243–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobbes, T. (1651/1963). Leviathan (mit einer Einführung von J. Plamenatz). Cleveland: World Pub.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, E., McCabe, K., Shachat, K. & Smith, V. (1994). Preferences, property rights and anonymity in bargaining games. Games and Economic Behavior, 7, 346–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kant, I. (1785/2004). Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten (hrsg., eingel. und erl. von Jens Timmermann). Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelley, H. H. & Thibaut, J. W. (1978). Interpersonal relations: A theory of interdependence. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krueger, J. I., DiDonato, T. E. & Freestone, D. (2012). Social projection can solve social dilemmas. Psychological Inquiry, 23, 1–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krueger, J. I. & Massey, A. L. (2009). A rational reconstruction of misbehavior. Social Cognition, 27, 785–810.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krueger, J. I., Massey, A. L. & DiDonato, T. E. (2008). A matter of trust: From social preferences to the strategic adherence of social norms. Negotiation & Conflict Management Research, 1, 31–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ledyard, J. O. & Palfrey, T. R. (1995). Experimental game theory introduction. Games and Economic Behavior, 10, 1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luce, R. D. & Raiffa, H. (1957). Games and decisions. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malthus, T. R. (1798). An essay on the principle of population, as it affects the future improvement of society. London: Johnson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nowak, M. & Sigmund, K. (1993). A strategy of win-stay, lose-shift that outperforms tit-for-tat in the prisoner’s dilemma game. Nature, 364, 56–58.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nummenmmaa, L., Hyönä, J. & Hietanen, J. K. (2009). I’ll walk this way. Psychological Science, 20, 1454–1458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orbell, J. M., Van de Kragt, A. J. & Dawes, R. M. (1988). Explaining discussion-induced cooperation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 811–819.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orbell, J. M. & Dawes, R. M. (1993). Social welfare, cooperators’ advantage, and the option of not playing the game. American Sociological Review, 58, 787–800.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome. Lexington: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pilkey, O. J. & Pilkey-Jarvis, L. (2007). Useless arithmetic: Why environmental scientists can’t predict the future. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pillutla, M. & Chen, X. P. (1999). Social norms and cooperation in social dilemmas. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 78, 81–103.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pruitt, D. G. & Kimmel, M. J. (1977). Twenty years of experimental gaming: Critique, sythesis, and suggestions for the future. Annual Review of Psychology, 28, 363–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, J.-J. (1755/1992). Discourse on the origins of inequality. Indianapolis: Hackett.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, B. A. W. (1959). Common sense and nuclear warfare. George Allen and Unwin: London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sally, D. (1995). Conversation and cooperation in social dilemmas. Rationality and Society, 7, 58–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shariff, A. F. & Noranzayan, A. (2007). God is watching you: Priming god concepts increases prosocial behavior in an anonymous economic game. Psychological Science, 18, 803–809.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A. (1759/1976). The theory of moral sentiments (hrsg. D. D. Raphael & A. L. Macfie). Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. J. (1982). Evolution and the theory of games. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Trivers, R. L. (1971). The evolution of reciprocal altruism. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 46, 35–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Utz, S. (2004). Self-activation is a two-edged sword: The effects of I primes on cooperation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 769–776.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Lange, P. A. M. (1999). The pursuit of joint outcomes and equality in outcomes: An integrative model of social value orientation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 337–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Neumann, J. & Morgenstern, O. (1947). Theory of games and economic behavior. Princeton. Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vohs, K. D. & Schooler, J. W. (2008). The value of believing in free will: Encouraging a belief in determinism increases cheating. Psychological Science, 19, 49–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, J. & Axelrod, R. (1995). How to cope with noise in the iterated prisoner’s dilemma. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 39, 183–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhong, C, -B., Loewenstein, J. & Murnighan, J. (2007). Speaking the same language: The cooperative effects of labeling in the prisoner’s dilemma. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 51, 431–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Fischer, P., Asal, K., Krueger, J. (2013). Soziale Dilemmata. In: Sozialpsychologie für Bachelor. Springer-Lehrbuch. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-30272-5_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics