Stanford research: Hidden benefits of gossip, ostracism

[cronus]

http://news.stanford.edu/news/2014/janu ... 12714.html

Stanford research: Hidden benefits of gossip, ostracism

While gossip and ostracism get a bad rap, they may be quite good for society, according to Stanford scholars.
Conventional wisdom holds that gossip and social exclusion are always malicious, undermining trust and morale in groups.
But that is not always true, according to a newstudy published in the journal Psychological Science. Robb Willer, an associate professor of sociology, explored the nature of gossip and ostracism in experimental groups in collaboration with co-authors Matthew Feinberg, a Stanford University postdoctoral researcher, and Michael Schultz from the University of California–Berkeley.
Their research showed that gossip and ostracism can have very positive effects. They are tools by which groups reform bullies, thwart exploitation of "nice people" and encourage cooperation.

"Groups that allow their members to gossip," said Feinberg, "sustain cooperation and deter selfishness better than those that don't. And groups do even better if they can gossip and ostracize untrustworthy members. While both of these behaviors can be misused, our findings suggest that they also serve very important functions for groups and society."
The research game involved 216 participants, divided into groups, who decided whether to make financial choices that would benefit their group.

Researchers commonly use this public-goods exercise to examine social dilemmas because individual participants will benefit the most by selfishly free-riding off everyone else's contributions while contributing nothing themselves.
Before moving on to the next round with an entirely new group, participants could gossip about their prior group members. Future group members then received that information and could decide to exclude – ostracize – a suspect participant from the group before deciding to make their next financial choices.

The researchers found that when people learn – through gossip – about the behavior of others, they use this information to align with those deemed cooperative. Those who have behaved selfishly can then be excluded from group activities, based on the prevailing gossip. This serves the group's greater good, for selfish types are known to exploit more cooperative people for their own gains.

"By removing defectors, more cooperative individuals can more freely invest in the public good without fear of exploitation," the researchers noted.
However, there is hope for the castaways. When people know that others may gossip about them – and experience the resulting social exclusion – they tend to learn from the experience and reform their behavior by cooperating more in future group settings. In contrast, highly anonymous groups, like many Internet message boards, lack accountability – allowing antisocial behavior to thrive.

"Those who do not reform their behavior," Willer said, "behaving selfishly despite the risk of gossip and ostracism, tended to be targeted by other group members who took pains to tell future group members about the person's untrustworthy behavior. These future groups could then detect and exclude more selfish individuals, ensuring they could avoid being taken advantage of."
The very threat of ostracism frequently deterred selfishness in the group. Even people who had been ostracized often contributed at higher levels when they returned to the group. "Exclusion compelled them to conform to the more cooperative behavior of the rest of the group," the researchers wrote.

The study reflects past research showing that when people know others may talk about their reputation, they tend to behave more generously. Where reputational concerns are especially strong, people sometimes engage in "competitive altruism," attempting to be highly pro-social to avoid exclusion from a group. The same appears to hold true for those returning from "exile" – the incentive is to cooperate rather than risk more trouble.

"Despite negative connotations, the pairing of the capacity to gossip and to ostracize undesirable individuals from groups has a strong positive effect on cooperation levels in groups," Willer said.

(continued)

[JimC]

Did you hear about Scumple, the chorus girl and the sea-otter?

[cronus]

Did you hear about Scumple, the chorus girl and the sea-otter?

That's not gossip, that's a fact.

[FBM]

Did you hear about Scumple, the chorus girl and the sea-otter?

That's not gossip, that's a fact.

Shhh! We're not talking to Jim anymore, remember?

[JimC]

That's alright, the voices in my head are company enough...

[Hermit]

Gossip for the win? Not, unless it reflects the truth, which is by no means guaranteed.

At best, like Chinese whispers, inadvertently, yet inevitably, gossip becomes quite removed from it, and it normally harms the reputation of the person it is about. Take a colleague of mine, for instance. A few months ago he turned a corner at the steelworks and the pallet carrying a 1300 kilogram hydraulic ram disintegrated, causing the lot to smash through the truck's gates and curtains. Two days later the weight of the item had grown to five tons. Then it was said that the driver was driving so fast around the corner that all the truck's wheels slid sideways on the dirt. Eventually, people heard that the ram narrowly missed rolling over a steel mill worker. People started keeping their distance from the driver, and he did not know why.

Worse still, gossip can be of intentionally and entirely made up content. There are in-groups and rivalries. Spreading falsehoods is an easy and often very effective way by a jealous person to manoeuvre someone out of the circle.

Whatever. Gossip is a fucking hopeless means for conveying information. If nothing else, it can be just annoying. Some years ago I was talking with the previous owner of the house I bought. Somehow he found cause to laud me for my business acumen, which he heard consisted of clever stock market trades. It never occurred to me to ask where he got that from, but I felt compelled to correct him: I had not played the stock market since I was 14 (being a minor, my father did the buying and selling on my instructions), and the amount of profit did not amount to a great deal by the time I lost interest in that activity. I think I managed to buy a pushbike and an air-rifle from the proceeds, and even those purchases needed additional funds that I got from collecting newspapers and magazines and selling them to recyclers. I told him that my money came from subcontracting my labour and my truck for 15 years at about 55 hours per week. His information was completely without foundation, and because I regard share traders as greedy cunts that contribute nothing to productivity, it annoyed me, even though he seemed to approve of my alleged activity.

[FBM]

That's alright, the voices in my head are company enough...

They're usually a lot more interesting than the people who talk to me, anyway.

[cronus]

America needs the Stasi, it's the best way to keep order. He ain't no gentleman Jim.