The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Why prosocials exhibit greater cooperation than proselfs: the roles of social responsibility and reciprocity
Open accessAbstract
Two studies examined the choice differences between prosocials and proselfs by examining the influence of norms of social responsibility and reciprocity. In line with the integrative model of social value orientation, it was expected that prosocials differ from proselfs in their level of cooperation because they wish to maximize own and other's outcomes (i.e. paralleling the norm of social responsibility) and enhance equality in outcomes (i.e. paralleling the norm of reciprocity). Study 1 revealed that prosocials felt more responsible to further the group's interest than proselfs did and this social responsibility feeling appeared to account for choice differences. Study 2 revealed that prosocials were more likely to reciprocate their partner's actions than were proselfs. Also, feelings of social responsibility did not account for this observation, suggesting that enhancing joint outcomes and equality in outcomes constitute two relatively independent dimensions. The findings are discussed in light of the integrative model of social value orientation. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Schwartz, S. H. (1992) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60281-6 · Cited by 14,619
The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement
Gouldner, A. W. (1960) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2092623 · Cited by 12,001
Cialdini, R. B., Kallgren, C. A., & Reno, R. R. (1991) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60330-5 · Cited by 3,143
Van Lange, P. A. M. (1999) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.77.2.337 · Cited by 1,127
Cited by
Personality and prosocial behavior: A theoretical framework and meta-analysis.
Thielmann, I., Spadaro, G., & Balliet, D. (2020) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/bul0000217 · Cited by 689
Social value orientation and cooperation in social dilemmas: a review and conceptual model
Bogaert, S., Boone, C., & Declerck, C. (2008) · British Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1348/014466607x244970 · Cited by 412
Social Justice: History, Theory, and Research
Jost, J. T., & Kay, A. C. (2010) · Handbook of Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/9780470561119.socpsy002030 · Cited by 253
Managing Group Behavior: The Interplay Between Procedural Justice, Sense of Self, and Cooperation
De Cremer, D., & Tyler, T. R. (2005) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(05)37003-1 · Cited by 253
Self-citationSocial mindfulness: skill and will to navigate the social world.
Van Doesum, N. J., Van Lange, D. A. W., & Van Lange, P. A. M. (2013) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0032540 · Cited by 241
Metadata
- Authors
- De Cremer, D., & Van Lange, P. A. M.
- Venue
- European Journal of Personality
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2001-11
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 1_suppl
- Pages
- S5-S18
- ISSN
- 0890-2070 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-0984
- OpenAlex
- W1972677166
- Cited by
- 271
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 11.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
