Dataset Information

Local competition increases people's willingness to harm others.

ABSTRACT: Why should organisms incur a cost in order to inflict a (usually greater) cost on others? Such costly harming behavior may be favored when competition for resources occurs locally, because it increases individuals' fitness relative to close competitors. However, there is no explicit experimental evidence supporting the prediction that people are more willing to harm others under local versus global competition. We illustrate this prediction with a game theoretic model, and then test it in a series of economic games. In these experiments, players could spend money to make others lose more. We manipulated the scale of competition by awarding cash prizes to the players with the highest payoffs per set of social partners (local competition) or in all the participants in a session (global competition). We found that, as predicted, people were more harmful to others when competition was local (Study 1). This result still held when people "earned" (rather than were simply given) their money (Study 2). In addition, when competition was local, people were more willing to harm ingroup members than outgroup members (Study 3), because ingroup members were the relevant competitive targets. Together, our results suggest that local competition in human groups not only promotes willingness to harm others in general, but also causes ingroup hostility.

SUBMITTER: Barker JL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5969529 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Local competition increases people's willingness to harm others.

Barker Jessica L JL Barclay Pat P

Evolution and human behavior : official journal of the Human Behavior and Evolution Society 20160701 4

Why should organisms incur a cost in order to inflict a (usually greater) cost on others? Such costly harming behavior may be favored when competition for resources occurs locally, because it increases individuals' fitness relative to close competitors. However, there is no explicit experimental evidence supporting the prediction that people are more willing to harm others under local versus global competition. We illustrate this prediction with a game theoretic model, and then test it in a seri ...[more]

PMID: 29805247

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo describe the level of overdetection people would find acceptable in screening for breast, prostate, and bowel cancer and whether acceptability is influenced by the magnitude of the benefit from screening and the cancer specific harms from overdetection.DesignOnline survey. Women were presented with scenarios on breast and bowel cancer, men with scenarios on prostate and bowel cancer. For each particular cancer, we presented epidemiological information and described the treatment and its consequences. Secondly, we presented two different scenarios of benefit: one indicating a 10% reduction in cancer specific mortality and the second indicating a 50% reduction.SettingOnline survey of the population in the United Kingdom.ParticipantsRespondents were part of an existing panel of people who volunteer for online research and were invited by email or online marketing. We recruited 1000 respondents, representative for age and sex for the UK population.Main outcome measuresNumber of cases of overdetection people were willing to accept, ranging from 0-1000 (complete screened population) for each cancer modality and each scenario of benefit.ResultsThere was large variability between respondents in the level of overdetection they would find acceptable, with medians ranging from 113 to 313 cases of overdetection per 1000 people screened. Across all scenarios, 4-7% of respondents indicated they would accept no overdetection at all compared with 7-14% who thought that it would be acceptable for the entire screened population to be overdetected. Acceptability in screening for bowel cancer was significantly lower than for breast and prostate cancer. People aged 50 or over accepted significantly less overdetection, whereas people with higher education levels accepted more; 29% of respondents had heard of overdetection before.ConclusionsAcceptability of overdetection in cancer screening is variable. Invitations for screening should include clear information on the likelihood and consequences of overdetection to allow people to make an informed choice.

Project description:Background and aimsAlcohol's harm to others (AHTO) has become a key driver of national and international alcohol policy. This study aimed to produce a contemporary, comprehensive estimate of the correlates and harms from others' drinking in 2021 in Australia.Design, setting, participants and measurementsAcross Australia, 2574 adults (1380 women; 1172 men) were sampled via two cross-sectional survey modes: a random-digit dial mobile phone sample of 1000 people and 1574 people from the Life in Australia™ panel survey. In 2021 participants were asked about harms they had experienced from the drinking of family, friends, co-workers and the public in the past year. Applying combined sample weights from each mode, bivariable and adjusted multivariable logistic regressions were used to analyse differences in rates of AHTO by participant gender, age, residence in rural or metropolitan regions, country of birth, education and employment.FindingsIn 2021, 23.6% reported being negatively affected by strangers' drinking and 21.3% by the drinking of someone they knew, with 34.3% reporting being negatively affected a lot or a little by either; 42.4% of respondents reported specific harms from strangers' drinking. Thus, 48.1% of respondents reported any harm (negative effects or specific harms) from others' drinking. Women, younger people, Australian-born and heavier episodic drinkers reported significantly higher rates of AHTO compared with other respondents. Smaller percentages (7.5%) of participants reported being harmed substantially by others' drinking, including by people they knew (5.8%) or strangers (2.3%). Stratified analyses showed that heavier drinking, furloughed, younger men who were born overseas in English-speaking countries were affected by others' drinking, whereas women were affected regardless of these factors (apart from age).ConclusionsMore than one-third of Australian adults appear to have been negatively affected by others' drinking in 2021, with women, younger people and heavier drinkers at greater risk. Substantial harm appears to be more likely to arise from the drinking of people Australians know than from strangers' drinking.

Dataset Information

Local competition increases people's willingness to harm others.

Publications

Local competition increases people's willingness to harm others.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets