Effective Matrices, Decision Frames, and Cooperation in Volunteer Dilemmas: A Theoretical Perspective on Academic Peer Review

References

• Axelrod R.The Evolution of Cooperation (1984) (Basic Books, New York) Google Scholar
• Bandura A.Social Learning Theory (1977) (General Learning Press, New York) Google Scholar
• Brewer M. B., Kramer R. M. Choice behavior in social dilemmas: Effects of social identity, group size, and decision framing. J. Personality Soc. Psych. (1986) 50(3):543–549Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bruner J. S. On perceptual readiness. Psychol. Rev. (1957) 64(2):123–152Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carpenter M. A. Mentoring colleagues in the craft and spirit of peer review. Acad. Management Rev. (2009) 34(2):191–195Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chubin D. E., Hackett E. J.Peerless Science: Peer Review and U.S. Science Policy (1990) (State University of New York Press, Albany) Google Scholar
• Daily C. M., Dalton D. R., Rajagopalan N. Governance through ownership: Centuries of practice, decades of research. Acad. Management J. (2003) 46(2):151–158Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dawes R. M., McTavish J., Shaklee H. Behavior, communication, and assumptions about other people's behavior in a commons dilemma situation. J. Personality Soc. Psych. (1977) 35(1):1–11Crossref, Google Scholar
• Glance N. S., Huberman B. A. The dynamics of social dilemmas. Scientific Amer. (1994) 270(3):76–81Crossref, Google Scholar
• Godlee F. Making reviewers visible: Openness, accountability, and credit. J. Amer. Medical Assoc. (2002) 287(21):2762–2765Crossref, Google Scholar
• Goffman E.Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience (1974) (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• Handgraaf M. J., van Dijk E., Vaermunt R. C., Wilke H. A., De Dreu C. K. Less power or powerless: Egocentric empathy gaps and the irony of having little versus no power in social decision making. J. Personality Soc. Psych. (2008) 95(5):1136–1149Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hardin G. The tragedy of the commons. Science (1968) 162(3859):1243–1248Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harrison D. Obligations and obfuscations in the review process. Acad. Management Rev. (2002) 45(6):1079–1084Crossref, Google Scholar
• Horrobin D. F. Something rotten at the core of science? Trends Pharmacol. Sci. (2001) 22(2):51–52Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kachelmeier S. J. Reviewing the review process. J. Amer. Taxation Assoc. (2004) 26(Supplement):143–154Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kelley H. H., Thibaut J. W.Interpersonal Relations: A Theory of Interdependence (1978) (Wiley-Interscience, New York) Google Scholar
• Kerr N. L., Kaufman-Gilliland C. M. Communication, commitment, and cooperation in social dilemma. J. Personality Soc. Psych. (1994) 66(3):513–529Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ketchen D. J. Volunteer and shirking behaviors among the Daca. Acad. Management J. (2008) 51(2):217–220Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kinicki A., Prussia G. From members of the editorial board. Acad. Management J. (2000) 43(5):799–800Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kramer R. M., Brewer M. B. Effects of group identity on resource use in a simulated commons dilemma. J. Personality Soc. Psych. (1984) 46(5):1044–1057Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kramer R. M., Brewer M. B., Wilke H. A. M., Messick D. M., Rutte C. G. Social group identity and the emergence of cooperation in resource conservation dilemmas. Experimental Studies of Social Dilemmas (1986) (Verlag Peter Lang, Frankfurt, Germany) 205–234Google Scholar
• Kollock P. Social dilemmas: The anatomy of cooperation. Annual Rev. Sociol. (1998) 24:183–214Crossref, Google Scholar
• Liberman V., Samuels S. M., Ross L. The name of the game: Predictive power of reputations versus situational labels in determining prisoner's dilemma game moves. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. (2004) 30(9):1175–1185Crossref, Google Scholar
• March J. G.A Primer on Decision Making: How Decisions Happen (1995) (Free Press, New York) Google Scholar
• Marwell G., Oliver P.The Critical Mass in Collective Action: A Micro-Social Theory (1993) (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA) Crossref, Google Scholar
• McCarter M. W., Rockman K. W., Northcraft G. B. Is it even worth it? The effect of loss prospects in the outcome distribution of a public goods dilemma. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes (2010) 111(1):1–12Crossref, Google Scholar
• Messick D. M. Alternative logics for decision making in social settings. J. Econom. Organ. (1999) 39(1):11–28Crossref, Google Scholar
• Murnighan J. K., Kim J. W., Metzger A. R. The volunteer dilemma. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1993) 38(4):515–538Crossref, Google Scholar
• Northcraft G. From the editors. Acad. Management J. (2001) 44(6):1079–1080Crossref, Google Scholar
• Omer T. C., Porter S., Yetman R., Magro A., Mills L., Sansing R., Ayers B. C. A discussion with reviewers: Insights from the midyear ATA meetings. J. Amer. Taxation Assoc. (2004) 26(Supplement):135–141Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pillutla M. M., Murnighan J. K. Unfairness, anger, and spite: Emotional rejections of ultimatum offers. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes (1996) 68(3):208–224Crossref, Google Scholar
• Podsakoff P. M., MacKenzie S. B., Paine J. B., Bachrach D. G. Organizational citizenship behaviors: A critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research. J. Management (2000) 26(3):513–563Crossref, Google Scholar
• Powell W. W., Kramer R. M., Tyler T. R. Trust-based forms of governance. Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Research (1995) (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA) 51–67Google Scholar
• Rutte C., Taborsky M. The influence of social experience on cooperative behaviour of rats (Rattus norvegicus): Direct vs generalized reciprocity. Behav. Ecological Sociobiology (2008) 62(4):499–505Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sawyer J. The altruism scale: A measure of co-operative, individualistic, and competitive interpersonal orientation. Amer. J. Sociol. (1966) 71(4):407–416Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schminke M. Tensions. Acad. Management J. (2002) 45(3):487–490Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schnake M. E. Equity in effort: The “sucker effect” in co-acting groups. J. Management (1991) 17(1):41–55Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simon H. A.Administrative Behavior (1957) (Macmillan, New York) Google Scholar
• Smith D. H. Altruism, volunteers, and volunteerism. J. Voluntary Action Res. (1983) 10(1):21–36Google Scholar
• Tajfel H.Human Groups and Social Categories: Studies in Social Psychology (1981) (Cambridge University Press, New York) Google Scholar
• Tenbrunsel A. E., Messick D. M. Sanctioning systems, decision frames, and cooperation. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1999) 44(4):648–707Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tenbrunsel A. E., Northcraft G., Kramer R. M., Tenbrunsel A. E., Bazerman M. H. In the eye of the beholder: Payoff structures and decision frames in social dilemmas. Social Decision Making: Social Dilemmas, Social Values, and Ethical Judgments (2010) (Psychology Press, New York) 95–115Google Scholar
• Tite L., Schroter S. Why do peer reviewers decline to review? A survey. J. Epidemiol. Community Health (2007) 61(1):9–12Crossref, Google Scholar
• Treviño L. K. Why review? Because reviewing is a professional obligation. Acad. Management Rev. (2008) 33(1):8–10Crossref, Google Scholar
• Trivers R. L. The evolution of reciprocal altruism. Quart. Rev. Biol. (1971) 46(1):35–57Crossref, Google Scholar
• van Dijk E., De Cremer D., Handgraaf M. J. J. Social value orientation and the strategic use of fairness in ultimatum bargaining. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. (2004) 40(6):697–707Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wade-Benzoni K. A., Tenbrunsel A. E., Bazerman M. H. Egocentric interpretations of fairness in environmental asymmetric social dilemmas: Explaining harvesting behavior and the role of communication. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes (1996) 67(2):111–126Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weber J. M., Kopelman S., Messick D. M. A conceptual review of decision making in social dilemmas: Applying a logic of appropriateness. Personality Soc. Psych. Rev. (2004) 8(3):281–307Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weber E. J., Katz P. P., Waeckerle J. F., Callaham M. L. Author perception of peer review: Impact of review quality and acceptance on satisfaction. J. Amer. Medical Assoc. (2002) 287(21):2790–2793Crossref, Google Scholar