The DOI matches its Crossref record; 57 of the 57 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Groups Make Better Self-Interested Decisions
Abstract
In this paper, we describe what economists have learned about differences between group and individual decision-making. This literature is still young, and in this paper, we will mostly draw on experimental work (mainly in the laboratory) that has compared individual decision-making to group decision-making, and to individual decision-making in situations with salient group membership. The bottom line emerging from economic research on group decision-making is that groups are more likely to make choices that follow standard game-theoretic predictions, while individuals are more likely to be influenced by biases, cognitive limitations, and social considerations. In this sense, groups are generally less “behavioral” than individuals. An immediate implication of this result is that individual decisions in isolation cannot necessarily be assumed to be good predictors of the decisions made by groups. More broadly, the evidence casts doubts on traditional approaches that model economic behavior as if individuals were making decisions in isolation.
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
The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money.
Schumpeter, J. A., & Keynes, J. M. (1936) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2278703 · Cited by 14,485
The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, by John Maynard Keynes
Beckhart, B. H. (1936) · Political Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2143949 · Cited by 6,220
Golden eggs and hyperbolic discounting
Laibson, D. (1997) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/003355397555253 · Cited by 6,122
Holmstrom, B. (1982) · The Bell Journal of Economics · doi:10.2307/3003457 · Cited by 4,903
Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: The conjunction fallacy in probability judgment.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1983) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.90.4.293 · Cited by 3,991
(2004) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.42-1645 · Cited by 2,925
What Do Laboratory Experiments Measuring Social Preferences Reveal About the Real World?
Levitt, S. D., & List, J. A. (2007) · Journal of Economic Perspectives · doi:10.1257/jep.21.2.153 · Cited by 2,668
Group Identity and Social Preferences
Chen, Y., & Li, S. X. (2009) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.99.1.431 · Cited by 1,536
(2006) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.43-3485 · Cited by 1,319
Mas, A., & Moretti, E. (2009) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.99.1.112 · Cited by 1,280
Cited by
Deciding for others reduces loss aversion
Andersson, O., Holm, H. J., Tyran, J.-R., & Wengström, E. (2016) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.2014.2085 · Cited by 194
Behavioral development economics
Kremer, M., Rao, G., & Schilbach, F. (2019) · Handbook of Behavioral Economics: Applications and Foundations 1 · doi:10.1016/bs.hesbe.2018.12.002 · Cited by 188
The choice of institutions to solve cooperation problems: a survey of experimental research
Dannenberg, A., & Gallier, C. (2020) · Experimental Economics · doi:10.1007/s10683-019-09629-8 · Cited by 75
Solar geoengineering may lead to excessive cooling and high strategic uncertainty
Abatayo, A. L., Bosetti, V., Casari, M., Ghidoni, R., & Tavoni, M. (2020) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1916637117 · Cited by 52
Metadata
- Authors
- Charness, G., & Sutter, M.
- Venue
- Journal of Economic Perspectives
- Publisher
- American Economic Association
- Published
- 2012-08-01
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 157-176
- ISSN
- 0895-3309 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2039940601
- Cited by
- 388
- References
- 57
- FWCI
- 71.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Groups Make Better Self-Interested Decisions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1257/jep.26.3.157
- The paper
- Charness, G., & Sutter, M. (2012). Groups Make Better Self-Interested Decisions. Journal of Economic Perspectives. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.26.3.157
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.
