Collusion improve relations, especially in women
In co-operation between people or companies have a lot of good. Another thing - the collusion, which can cause loss interest of all parties.
PHOTO Getty Images
Norwegian economist Oskhild Uglen Johnsen (Åshild Auglænd Johnsen) in preparation for a doctoral thesis conducted an experiment that showed that women are particularly prone to collusion that benefit the cooperating parties, but harm the interests of outsiders.
In the 1990s, the security services have identified the cartel among producers of animal feed. FBI established "bugs" at a secret meeting of the participants of collusion. During the meeting, one of them said, "competitors - they are our friends. And clients - our enemies. "
"This statement indicates that the participant collusion believed that profit comes at the expense of the interests of customers. This shows that corruption is not only income, illegal conspiracy to obtain profits are also important social relations ", - says Oskhild Johnsen.
During the experiment, which was carried out Oskhild Johnsen, she invited participants to the two versions of the game kind of "prisoner's dilemma". In the first embodiment, both the game participant gain maximum profit (40 NOK) in the event that they have agreed to collaborate with each other. However, if only one of the subjects agreed to cooperate, he received a much smaller amount (12 kroons), while the second, which is abandoned collusion received 50 kroner. If both the volunteer refuses to cooperate, each received 25 crowns. In the second version of the game non-cooperation would bring an additional benefit for "society" (in the role of a student organization that advocated "). Oskhild Johnsen is assumed that participants will be less likely to agree to cooperate, knowing that failure is beneficial to society, but all turned out to be contrary to the reality. Subjects were often collusion and maintained it for a longer period of time than in the first embodiment of the game, - knowing this way damage to unauthorized persons.
Oskhild Johnsen offers several explanations for these results: "One theory is that the" criminal "conspiracy promotes the formation of stronger relationships between people." For example, if two peers agree together to steal from their employer, such a conspiracy could unite them stronger than usual collaboration.
Another explanation is that people can first take the moral right decisions, and only then, "with a clear conscience", to start making immoral acts for their own benefit. At the beginning of study participants did not hasten to agree with each other, but then gradually increased the amount of collusion.
One of the most remarkable observation is that the collusion to the detriment of "public interest" women were significantly more likely than men. In the first version of the game the men cooperated more often than women. But in the second case, when co prejudice to third parties, women were more likely to make a deal. A possible explanation: "There are theories stating that men prefer to have a large circle of social contacts, while not supporting anyone particularly close relationship, women prefer a small circle of friends, each of which are supported by close relations - suggests Oskhild Johnsen. - Perhaps this is why women choose to work closely with a partner, despite the fact that it can cause damage to a large number of unauthorized persons ".
For details, see. Å. Johnsen "Conspiracy against the public - an experiment on collusion" in Essays on Cooperation and Distribution, doctoral thesis, University of Stavanger, 2015.