Synchrony Cooperation Scott S Wiltermuth and Chip Heath

Synchrony & Cooperation Scott S. Wiltermuth and Chip Heath

Purpose The authors suggest that acting in synchrony with others can foster cooperation within groups by strengthening group cohesion.

Synchrony • Occurs when people move in time with one another • Cultural practices: 1. Armies 2. Churches 3. Communities 4. Organizations

Current theories • Muscular bonding (Mc. Neill, 1995) • Mediated by positive emotions • Ehrenreich, 2006; Hannah, 1997 • Collective effervescence

Collective Effervescence • Andaman Islanders: become absorbed in the unified community through dance (Radcliffe-Brown, 1992) • http: //www. youtube. com/watch? v=Oc. FEjpn 8 Sl. U

Andaman Islanders • Out-of-Africa Migration (Wade, 2006)

Collective Effervescence • Modern examples: 1. Carnival revelers (Ehrenreich, 2006) 2. Ravers (Olaveson, 2004) • What are some others?

A lack of evidence… • A causal linkage from synchrony to group cohesion. • What types of synchrony promote cohesion? • Necessity of collective effervescence.

Hypotheses • Synchrony-cooperation hypothesis • Muscular-bonding hypothesis • “Collective effervescence” hypothesis

Study 1 • Purpose: Can synchrony boost cooperation and cohesion? • 30 participants: Groups of 3 • Phase I: Campus Walk • Two conditions: synchrony vs. control • Phase II: Weak Link Coordination Exercise • Phase III: Questionnaire

Weak Link Coordination Exercise • Measures expectations of cooperation

Study 1: Questions • How connected did you feel with the other participants during the walk? • How much did you trust the other participants going into the exercise? • How happy do you feel?

Study 1: Results • Synchrony-cooperation hypothesis • Synchronous condition chose higher numbers in the first round • Synchrony-cohesion hypothesis • Synchronous condition felt more connected with their counterparts • Collective effervescence hypothesis • Synchronous condition did not feel happier

Study 2 • Purpose: Can synchrony boost cooperation above common identity and common fate? • 96 participants: Groups of 3 • Phase I: Cups-and-music task • Four Conditions • Phase II: Weak Link Coordination Exercise • Phase III: Questionnaire

Cups-and-music task • Listening to “O Canada” and holding a cup • Four conditions 1. 2. 3. 4. No singing, no moving (Control) Synchronous-singing (SS) Synchronous-singing-and-moving (SSM) Asynchronous-singing-and-moving (ASM)

Study 2: Questions • How much did you feel you were on the same team as the other participants? • How much did you trust the other participants going into the exercise? • How similar are you to the other participants? • How happy are you right now?

Study 2: Results • Muscular-bonding hypothesis • Cooperation did not differ between SS and SSM

Study 2: Results • Synchrony-cooperation hypothesis • In Round 1 and the final round, SS and SSM chose: • Significantly higher numbers than ASM • Marginally higher numbers than Control

Study 2: Results • Synchrony-cohesion hypothesis • SS and SSM reported greater feelings of being on the same team • Collective effervescence hypothesis • Synchronous condition did not feel happier • Payoffs • SS and SSM received higher payoffs than did ASM or Control

Study 3 • Purpose: Can moving in synchrony boost cooperation when behaving cooperatively conflicts with personal self-interest? • 95 participants: Groups of 3 • Phase I: Cups-and-music task • Phase II: Public-Goods Game • Phase III: Questionnaire (Study 2)

Public-Goods Game • Each of three participants has 10 tokens in each of 5 rounds • Public account - $0. 25 to each member • Private account - $0. 50 to private member • Dominant strategy is to behave selfishly

Study 3: Results • Synchrony-cooperation hypothesis • SS and SSM contributed marginally more tokens in Round 1 and significantly more in all subsequent rounds than: • ASM • Control (except Round 5)

Study 3: Results • Over time • SS and SSM persisted while ASM contributed significantly less tokens from first to last round

Study 3: Results • Synchrony-cohesion hypothesis • SS and SSM reported greater feelings of being on the same team • Partially mediated the effect of conditions on contributions • Rounds 3 & 5

Study 3: Results • Payoffs • SS and SSM received higher payoffs than did ASM or Control • Similarity and Trust • SS and SSM felt more similar to their counterparts than did ASM and trusted them marginally more • Collective effervescence hypothesis • SS and ssm did not feel happier

Conclusion • Acting in synchrony with others can increase cohesion and cooperation. • Muscular-bonding and collective effervescence hypotheses were not supported. • Evolutionary implications

Synchrony in the Andes • Synchronous rituals • Rugby – prior to the crash • Prayer – following the crash • Provided this evidence, synchrony may have contributed to the strong cohesiveness and cooperation that allowed these individuals to survive such extreme circumstances.