Replication Data for: Selfish and cooperative voting: Can the majority restrain themselves?

At every scale from small committees to national elections, voters face tradeoffs between self-interest and the common good. We report three experiments in which participants vote for policies with real payoffs at stake. We manipulate self-interest by randomly assigning participants to two groups in...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Hauptverfasser: DeScioli, Peter, Cho, Bowen, Bokemper, Scott E., Delton, Andrew W.
Format: Dataset
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext bestellen
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page
container_title
container_volume
creator DeScioli, Peter
Cho, Bowen
Bokemper, Scott E.
Delton, Andrew W.
description At every scale from small committees to national elections, voters face tradeoffs between self-interest and the common good. We report three experiments in which participants vote for policies with real payoffs at stake. We manipulate self-interest by randomly assigning participants to two groups in society with different policy payoffs. Participants in the majority group are confronted by a simple choice between a policy that is better for themselves or a policy that is best for society. Overall, we find a clear effect of self-interest: Participants are more likely to choose the policy that earns them more money, compared to participants in the other group, even when the policy is detrimental to the common good. Simultaneously, we observe considerable levels of cooperative voting among participants in the majority, ranging from 47%-79% across different payoff regimes. Finally, participants were not more cooperative when voting compared to when they chose between the same policies with a lottery or leader institution, departing from the hypothesis that voting institutions promote cooperative motives. We discuss implications for multiple literatures about voting behavior.
doi_str_mv 10.7910/dvn/cfeieq
format Dataset
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>datacite_PQ8</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_datacite_primary_10_7910_dvn_cfeieq</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>10_7910_dvn_cfeieq</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-d71q-a420807d1e3bb4ba185ff162f6eb5ae7d1f2ac8a2f684f4c833db118757fae0a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNotjz1rwzAYhLV0KGmX_gLNBTeSZcdqllLcTwgUmmwZzCvpVaNiW44kDPn3VZtOB3fHcQ8hN5zdNfecLc08LrVFh8dLsv_EqXcakvMjfYIE1PqwplvsrYsHCqOh2vsJQ27MSGef3Pi1pi2MNB2QDvDtg0snGjCmAO7PHSL2M8aHK3JhoY94_a8Lsnt53rVvxebj9b193BSm4ccCqpJJ1hiOQqlKAZe1tXxV2hWqGjAHtgQtIRuyspWWQhjFuWzqxgIyEAtye541-b52CbspuAHCqeOs-wXuMnB3BhY_LlJTCA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Publisher</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>dataset</recordtype></control><display><type>dataset</type><title>Replication Data for: Selfish and cooperative voting: Can the majority restrain themselves?</title><source>DataCite</source><creator>DeScioli, Peter ; Cho, Bowen ; Bokemper, Scott E. ; Delton, Andrew W.</creator><creatorcontrib>DeScioli, Peter ; Cho, Bowen ; Bokemper, Scott E. ; Delton, Andrew W.</creatorcontrib><description>At every scale from small committees to national elections, voters face tradeoffs between self-interest and the common good. We report three experiments in which participants vote for policies with real payoffs at stake. We manipulate self-interest by randomly assigning participants to two groups in society with different policy payoffs. Participants in the majority group are confronted by a simple choice between a policy that is better for themselves or a policy that is best for society. Overall, we find a clear effect of self-interest: Participants are more likely to choose the policy that earns them more money, compared to participants in the other group, even when the policy is detrimental to the common good. Simultaneously, we observe considerable levels of cooperative voting among participants in the majority, ranging from 47%-79% across different payoff regimes. Finally, participants were not more cooperative when voting compared to when they chose between the same policies with a lottery or leader institution, departing from the hypothesis that voting institutions promote cooperative motives. We discuss implications for multiple literatures about voting behavior.</description><identifier>DOI: 10.7910/dvn/cfeieq</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Harvard Dataverse</publisher><subject>Social Sciences</subject><creationdate>2018</creationdate><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>781,1895</link.rule.ids><linktorsrc>$$Uhttps://commons.datacite.org/doi.org/10.7910/dvn/cfeieq$$EView_record_in_DataCite.org$$FView_record_in_$$GDataCite.org$$Hfree_for_read</linktorsrc></links><search><creatorcontrib>DeScioli, Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cho, Bowen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bokemper, Scott E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Delton, Andrew W.</creatorcontrib><title>Replication Data for: Selfish and cooperative voting: Can the majority restrain themselves?</title><description>At every scale from small committees to national elections, voters face tradeoffs between self-interest and the common good. We report three experiments in which participants vote for policies with real payoffs at stake. We manipulate self-interest by randomly assigning participants to two groups in society with different policy payoffs. Participants in the majority group are confronted by a simple choice between a policy that is better for themselves or a policy that is best for society. Overall, we find a clear effect of self-interest: Participants are more likely to choose the policy that earns them more money, compared to participants in the other group, even when the policy is detrimental to the common good. Simultaneously, we observe considerable levels of cooperative voting among participants in the majority, ranging from 47%-79% across different payoff regimes. Finally, participants were not more cooperative when voting compared to when they chose between the same policies with a lottery or leader institution, departing from the hypothesis that voting institutions promote cooperative motives. We discuss implications for multiple literatures about voting behavior.</description><subject>Social Sciences</subject><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>dataset</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>dataset</recordtype><sourceid>PQ8</sourceid><recordid>eNotjz1rwzAYhLV0KGmX_gLNBTeSZcdqllLcTwgUmmwZzCvpVaNiW44kDPn3VZtOB3fHcQ8hN5zdNfecLc08LrVFh8dLsv_EqXcakvMjfYIE1PqwplvsrYsHCqOh2vsJQ27MSGef3Pi1pi2MNB2QDvDtg0snGjCmAO7PHSL2M8aHK3JhoY94_a8Lsnt53rVvxebj9b193BSm4ccCqpJJ1hiOQqlKAZe1tXxV2hWqGjAHtgQtIRuyspWWQhjFuWzqxgIyEAtye541-b52CbspuAHCqeOs-wXuMnB3BhY_LlJTCA</recordid><startdate>2018</startdate><enddate>2018</enddate><creator>DeScioli, Peter</creator><creator>Cho, Bowen</creator><creator>Bokemper, Scott E.</creator><creator>Delton, Andrew W.</creator><general>Harvard Dataverse</general><scope>DYCCY</scope><scope>PQ8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>2018</creationdate><title>Replication Data for: Selfish and cooperative voting: Can the majority restrain themselves?</title><author>DeScioli, Peter ; Cho, Bowen ; Bokemper, Scott E. ; Delton, Andrew W.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-d71q-a420807d1e3bb4ba185ff162f6eb5ae7d1f2ac8a2f684f4c833db118757fae0a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>datasets</rsrctype><prefilter>datasets</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Social Sciences</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>DeScioli, Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cho, Bowen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bokemper, Scott E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Delton, Andrew W.</creatorcontrib><collection>DataCite (Open Access)</collection><collection>DataCite</collection></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext_linktorsrc</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>DeScioli, Peter</au><au>Cho, Bowen</au><au>Bokemper, Scott E.</au><au>Delton, Andrew W.</au><format>book</format><genre>unknown</genre><ristype>DATA</ristype><title>Replication Data for: Selfish and cooperative voting: Can the majority restrain themselves?</title><date>2018</date><risdate>2018</risdate><abstract>At every scale from small committees to national elections, voters face tradeoffs between self-interest and the common good. We report three experiments in which participants vote for policies with real payoffs at stake. We manipulate self-interest by randomly assigning participants to two groups in society with different policy payoffs. Participants in the majority group are confronted by a simple choice between a policy that is better for themselves or a policy that is best for society. Overall, we find a clear effect of self-interest: Participants are more likely to choose the policy that earns them more money, compared to participants in the other group, even when the policy is detrimental to the common good. Simultaneously, we observe considerable levels of cooperative voting among participants in the majority, ranging from 47%-79% across different payoff regimes. Finally, participants were not more cooperative when voting compared to when they chose between the same policies with a lottery or leader institution, departing from the hypothesis that voting institutions promote cooperative motives. We discuss implications for multiple literatures about voting behavior.</abstract><pub>Harvard Dataverse</pub><doi>10.7910/dvn/cfeieq</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext_linktorsrc
identifier DOI: 10.7910/dvn/cfeieq
ispartof
issn
language eng
recordid cdi_datacite_primary_10_7910_dvn_cfeieq
source DataCite
subjects Social Sciences
title Replication Data for: Selfish and cooperative voting: Can the majority restrain themselves?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-13T20%3A58%3A38IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-datacite_PQ8&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=unknown&rft.au=DeScioli,%20Peter&rft.date=2018&rft_id=info:doi/10.7910/dvn/cfeieq&rft_dat=%3Cdatacite_PQ8%3E10_7910_dvn_cfeieq%3C/datacite_PQ8%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true