Analytical thinking, prosocial voting, and intergroup competition: experimental evidence from China
- PDF / 917,884 Bytes
- 23 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 7 Downloads / 149 Views
Analytical thinking, prosocial voting, and intergroup competition: experimental evidence from China Rebecca B. Morton1,2 · Kai Ou3 · Xiangdong Qin4 Received: 22 October 2020 / Accepted: 31 October 2020 © Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2020
Abstract We investigate whether and how analytical thinking affects Muslims’ prosocial voting towards in-group (fellow Muslims) and out-group (Han Chinese) members. We conduct an incentivized laboratory-style voting experiment in western China, where tension and competition exist between the two ethnic groups. We find a significant negative effect of analytical thinking on prosocial voting in general. We also find that the effect of analytical thinking is related to group identity: A strong and significant negative effect is found on behavior towards out-group members, but a small and generally insignificant effect towards in-group members. Our results are consistent with group competition affecting the benefits and costs of prosocial voting, and those benefits and costs become more salient when engaging in analytical thinking. Keywords Analytical thinking · Chinese Muslim · Intergroup competition · Ethnic identity · Lab-in-the-field experiment
Support for this research from Shanghai Jiao Tong University and New York University is gratefully acknowledged. We are grateful for the comments from conference and seminar audience at the ESA North American Meeting, Sciences Po, Pairs School of Economics, Stony Brook University, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, New York University and Florida State University. We thank Jun Feng and Luqing Yu for their assistance in conducting the experiments. All errors remain the responsibility of the authors. Rebecca B. Morton: Deceased on September 27, 2020. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (https://doi.org/10.1007/s1112 7-020-00859-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. * Xiangdong Qin [email protected] Kai Ou [email protected] 1
New York University Abu-Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
2
New York University, New York, USA
3
Department of Political Science, and Faculty of the XS/FS Experimental Social Science Research Group, Florida State University, 554 Bellamy Hall, Tallahassee, FL 32306‑2230, USA
4
Antai College of Economics and Management, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, 1954 Hua Shan Road, Shanghai 200030, China
13
Vol.:(0123456789)
Public Choice
JEL Classification C9 · D6 · D7 · H0
1 Introduction When groups are in competition, identity is found to induce ingroup favoritism (Akerlof and Kranton 2000; Chen and Li 2009) and reduce intergroup cooperation (Habyarimana et al. 2007; Fearon and Laitin 1996; Larson 2017). Why do people in different groups discriminate against each other? Answering that question is important because discrimination hurts society in general. It has serious and long-term effects on people’s lives, and it inhibits economic and democratic development (Alesina et al. 1999). In recent studies, scholars
Data Loading...
