Contents
There are many good things in cooperation between people or companies. Another thing is a secret collusion, which can cause damage to the interests of all parties.
Norwegian economist Åshild Auglænd Johnsen, as part of her doctoral dissertation, conducted an experiment that showed that women are particularly prone to collusion that benefits cooperating individuals, but at the same time harms the interests of outsiders.
In the 1990s, intelligence agencies uncovered a cartel among pet food manufacturers. The American FBI planted “bugs” at a secret meeting of the participants in the conspiracy. During the meeting, one of them said: “Competitors are our friends. And customers are our enemies.”
“This statement indicates that the participant in the conspiracy believed that profits were being made to the detriment of the interests of clients. This shows that corruption is not only about income, social relations are also important in illegal collusion for profit,” says Aeschild Junsen.
In the course of the experiment, which was conducted by Aeschild Junsen, she offered the participants two versions of the prisoner’s dilemma game. In the first variant, both participants in the game received the maximum profit (NOK 40) if they agreed to cooperate with each other. However, if only one of the subjects agreed to cooperate, he received a significantly smaller amount (12 crowns), while the second, who refused to collude, received 50 crowns. If both volunteers refused to cooperate, each received 25 crowns.
Read more:
- Men play, women dream?
In the second version of the game, non-cooperation brought additional benefits to the “society” (which was the student organization). Aeschild Junsen assumed that the participants would be less likely to agree to cooperate, knowing that the refusal is beneficial to society, but in reality the opposite was true. The subjects were more likely to collude and maintain it for a longer period of time than in the first version of the game – knowing that in this way they cause damage to outsiders.
Aeschild Junsen offers several explanations for these results: “One theory is that ‘criminal’ collusion contributes to the formation of stronger relationships between people.” For example, if two colleagues agree to steal from their employer together, such collusion can rally them more than a normal joint work.
Another explanation is that people can first make morally correct decisions, and only then, “with a clear conscience”, begin to commit immoral acts for their own benefit. At the beginning of the experiment, the participants were in no hurry to negotiate with each other, but then the number of collusions gradually increased.
Read more:
- Men and women: whose psyche is more stable?
One of the most remarkable observations was that women were much more willing to collude against the “public interest” than men. In the first version of the game, men cooperated more often than women. But in the second case, when cooperation was detrimental to third parties, women were more likely to collude.
Possible explanation: “There are theories that men prefer to have a large circle of social contacts, while not maintaining a particularly close relationship with anyone, while women prefer a narrow circle of acquaintances, with each of whom they maintain a fairly close relationship,” suggests Aeschild Junsen. “Perhaps this is why women choose to work closely with a partner, despite the fact that it can be detrimental to a large number of outsiders.”
Подробнее см. Å. Johnsen «Conspiracy against the public – an experiment on collusion» in Essays on Cooperation and Distribution, doctoral thesis, University of Stavanger, 2015.