Reciprocity (social psychology)
[1] As a social construct, reciprocity means that in response to friendly actions, people are generally nicer and more cooperative.
However, its prevalence in society allows it to play a key role in the decision-making process of self-interested and other-interested (or altruistic) individuals.
Hammurabi's code, a collection of 282 laws and standards, lists crimes and their various punishments, as well as guidelines for citizens' conduct.
In Homeric Greece, citizens relied on reciprocity as a form of transaction as there was no formal system of government or trade.
For example, in Book VI of the Iliad, Glaucus and Diomedes exchange armor when they discover that their grandfathers were friends.
[10] In the classical Greek polis, large-scale projects such as construction of temples, building of warships and financing of choruses were carried out as gifts from individual donors.
Cultural anthropologists support this idea in what they call the "web of indebtedness" where reciprocity is viewed as an adaptive mechanism to enhance survival.
Through the rule of reciprocity, sophisticated systems of aid and trade were possible, bringing immense benefits to the societies that utilized them.
[15] Given the benefits of reciprocity at the societal level, it is not surprising that the norm has persisted and dictates our present cognition and behavior.
Reciprocity is not only a strong determining factor of human behavior; it is a powerful method for gaining one's compliance with a request.
[17] In 1971, Dennis Regan tested the strength of these two aspects of reciprocity in a study entitled "Effects of a Favor and Liking on Compliance."
[15] In 1976, Phillip Kunz demonstrated the automatic nature of reciprocity in his experiment, "Season's greetings: From my status to yours" using Christmas cards.
While he anticipated some responses, holiday cards came pouring back to him from people who had never met nor heard of him and who expressed no desire to get to know him any better.
This is a significant illustration of the idea of 'tit-for-tat', where in payoff-based scenarios, individuals will commit to cooperative strategies if they stand to gain from them as well.
In more modern societies and structures of justice, this generally translates into legal action, jail time, and even the death penalty.
[24] Retaliation, or revenge, actions taken against a person or group to induce harm in response to a previous grievance is an example of negative reciprocity.
Mutual concession is a procedure that can promote compromise in a group so that individuals can refocus their efforts toward achieving a common goal.
Reciprocal concessions promote compromise in a group so that the initial and incompatible desires of individuals can be set aside for the benefit of social cooperation.
If the first request is so big that it is seen as unreasonable, the door in the face technique proves useless as the concession made after may not be perceived as genuine.
[37] The book Influence: Science and Practice by Robert Cialdini is a prominent work in the field of reciprocity and social psychology.
First published in 1984, the work outlines the main principles of influence, and how they can be applied in one's life to succeed, especially in business endeavors.
Social reciprocity holds significant importance in the workplace as it contributes to the foundation for effective collaboration, teamwork, and a positive work environment.
When employees reciprocate positive actions, such as providing support, sharing information, or acknowledging achievements, it contributes to a culture of mutual respect and cooperation.
[42] By experiencing a continued lack of reciprocity, the perceived positive work culture may erode, causing negative associations to form with the workplace and one's coworkers.
Failed reciprocity, a lack of an equivalent favor in return for a positive action, in the workplace has the potential to diminish trust, weaken social support, and can even increase the probability of suffering from stress-related diseases.
[42] In attempting to improve the quality of a work environment, it is crucial to acknowledge and encourage efforts of reciprocity within the employees.
A news article summarizing similar research studies suggests that negative reciprocity might exist in order to restore or build a cooperative relationship.
[45] A coordinated meta-analysis of 30 fMRI studies concluded that trust in reciprocity might cause an adverse feeling at the beginning of a series of interactions with a stranger.
This is likely due to the inherent uncertainty of a decision outcome, leading individuals to be unsure about whether the other person will reciprocate their actions.
However, even with reduced cognitive control, they chose to benefit from the exchange if the outward perception of their behavior would look fair and reciprocal.
