The threat of gossip can rein in selfishness

Jul 12, 2011

Gossip can be hurtful, unproductive, and mean. It can also be an important part of making sure that people will share and cooperate, according to a study in the current Social Psychological and Personality Science.

Researchers Bianca Beersma and Gerben Van Kleef of the University of Amsterdam set out to test whether the threat of gossip could suppress . To do so, they brought people into the lab, and convinced them that they were part of a group that would interact first through computers and then face-to-face.

People were told they had been randomly chosen to distribute 100 tickets for a cash-prize lottery. With the task, people could be generous and distribute the tickets to group members, or they could be selfish, and keep a large share of the tickets for themselves.

Half of the time, the person was told that the choice would be kept private -- none of the other group members would know how many tickets went into their personal account. The rest of the time, people expected that their group members would know exactly how many tickets they kept for themselves.

Sometimes the participants were told that other group members were prone to, and sometimes they were told the other group members were quite unlikely to gossip.

Beersma and Van Kleef wanted to know just how generous people would be, and so they had people actually dole out the tickets, and compared how selfish or generous people would be when they faced the prospect of their decisions being the topic of gossip.

In every condition, people acted selfishly to some degree—most people kept more than an equal share for themselves. But when their actions were public and the chance for gossip was high, people became substantially less selfish. When people knew that their selfishness would be on display—and very likely to be talked about—they acted most generously to others.

"When the threat of gossip exists, can expect that they will be talked about if they decide to take a free ride" wrote the authors. Gossip can be malicious and harmful to groups, but it can have a positive side -- the threat of can increase fairness and hold selfishness in check.

Explore further: The rich have more political clout in states, but stricter lobbying rules can narrow gap

More information: The article "How the Grapevine Keeps You in Line: Gossip Increases Contributions to the Group" in Social Psychological and Personality Science is available free for a limited time at: spp.sagepub.com/content/early/… 405073.full.pdf+html

Provided by SAGE Publications

3.5 /5 (2 votes)
add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Gossip serves a useful purpose after all

May 20, 2011

(Medical Xpress) -- Researchers in the US have discovered that hearing gossip about a person literally changes the way you see them, and hearing negative information about people makes their faces stand out.

Gossip in the workplace: A weapon or gift

Oct 28, 2009

Gossip in the workplace can be a weapon in reputational warfare or a gift and can offer clues to power and influence not found on organizational charts. New research from Indiana University details how the ...

Winning lottery strategy proposed by professor

Jan 10, 2011

The record-breaking $380 million Mega Millions multistate lottery jackpot drawing this week had two winners and may inspire more people to take a chance on being a millionaire.

Recommended for you

Poverty rate drops for the first time since 2006

22 hours ago

The poverty rate in the United States has dropped for the first time since 2006, bringing a bit of encouraging news about the nation's economy as President Barack Obama and Congress gear up for the November elections.

User comments : 1

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Pediopal
not rated yet Jul 12, 2011
Could have saved a lot of time and money by asking any Native American elder. The Natives use gossip quite effectively. Sadly, the European invaders did not care what the Natives were saying about them and went on to exterminate 95% of the indigenous population. It took whites another 500 years to relearn what was know and used quite effectively for millennia over here.