Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 394

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The Provision of a Sanctioning System in the United States and Japan

Yamagishi, Toshio·1988·Social Psychology Quarterly

Abstract

Yamagishi's (1986a) experiment, which tested hypotheses derived from the structural goal/expectation approach to the problem of social dilemmas, was replicated using North American subjects. The results of the current experiment, using 48 same-sex, four-person groups, replicated the major findings of the original study. In addition, American subjects had a higher level of trust and cooperated more in the absence of a sanctioning system than did Japanese subjects. On the other hand, the predicted difference between American and Japanese subjects in the contribution to the provision of a sanctioning system did not emerge.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/2786924

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 394

Metadata

Authors
Yamagishi, T.
Venue
Social Psychology Quarterly
Published
1988-09
Volume
51
Issue
3
Pages
265
ISSN
0190-2725 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2092090726
Cited by
394
References
0
FWCI
6.73
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: The Provision of a Sanctioning System in the United States and Japan. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/2786924
The paper
Yamagishi, T. (1988). The Provision of a Sanctioning System in the United States and Japan. Social Psychology Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.2307/2786924

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.