EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

The intuitive cooperation hypothesis revisited: a meta-analytic examination of effect size and between-study heterogeneity

Amanda Kvarven, Eirik Strømland, Conny Wollbrant, David Andersson, Magnus Johannesson (), Gustav Tinghög, Daniel Västfjäll and Kristian Ove R. Myrseth ()
Additional contact information
Amanda Kvarven: University of Bergen
Eirik Strømland: University of Bergen
Conny Wollbrant: University of Stirling
David Andersson: Linköping University
Gustav Tinghög: Linköping University
Daniel Västfjäll: Linköping University
Kristian Ove R. Myrseth: University of York

Journal of the Economic Science Association, 2020, vol. 6, issue 1, No 3, 26-42

Abstract: Abstract The hypothesis that intuition promotes cooperation has attracted considerable attention. Although key results in this literature have failed to replicate in pre-registered studies, recent meta-analyses report an overall effect of intuition on cooperation. We address the question with a meta-analysis of 82 cooperation experiments, spanning four different types of intuition manipulations—time pressure, cognitive load, depletion, and induction—including 29,315 participants in total. We obtain a positive overall effect of intuition on cooperation, though substantially weaker than that reported in prior meta-analyses, and between studies the effect exhibits a high degree of systematic variation. We find that this overall effect depends exclusively on the inclusion of six experiments featuring emotion-induction manipulations, which prompt participants to rely on emotion over reason when making allocation decisions. Upon excluding from the total data set experiments featuring this class of manipulations, between-study variation in the meta-analysis is reduced substantially—and we observed no statistically discernable effect of intuition on cooperation. Overall, we fail to obtain compelling evidence for the intuitive cooperation hypothesis.

Keywords: Cooperation; Dual-process; Intuition; Time pressure; Cognitive load (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: Track citations by RSS feed

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40881-020-00084-3 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
Working Paper: The Intuitive Cooperation Hypothesis Revisited: A Meta-analytic Examination of Effect-size and Between-study Heterogeneity (2019) Downloads
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:jesaex:v:6:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s40881-020-00084-3

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/journal/40881

DOI: 10.1007/s40881-020-00084-3

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of the Economic Science Association is currently edited by Nikos Nikiforakis and Robert Slonim

More articles in Journal of the Economic Science Association from Springer, Economic Science Association Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().

 
Page updated 2020-11-11
Handle: RePEc:spr:jesaex:v:6:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s40881-020-00084-3