Group Preferences or Group Strategies? Untangling the Determinants of Successful Collective Action Among Ethnic and Gender Groups

We use experimental methods and a multi-ethnic, mixed gender sample to distinguish between preference-based and strategy-based explanations for how groups succeed in solving collective action problems. Our results suggest that strategic considerations play a more prominent role than preferences in explaining variation across gender and ethnic groups in the choices that players make. Although we find that males have stronger preferences for co-ethnics than for non-co-ethnics, we find only weak evidence that preferences are structured ethnic lines. Strikingly, we find no evidence that preferences are structured along gender lines: when unobserved, neither gender treats the other gender substantively differently. Nonetheless, strategic action can be observed, especially within gendered pairings. We find that co-ethnics are more successful in achieving efficient outcomes and that this is not due to more stringent punishment behavior but rather because of greater consistency in strategies. We find stronger evidence that gender conventions structure the behavior of our subjects. Men, we find, act “chivalrously” towards women, but only when they can be seen to be acting chivalrously. Women expect this better treatment from men, and punish men that fail to treat them well. ∗ Prepared for delivery at the 2004 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, September 25, 2004. Copyright by the American Political Science Association. The authors thank Chris Crabbe for his superb programming work; Dan Young, Donna Horowitz, and Kevin Thelen for their research assistance; the Russell Sage Foundation, the Harry Frank Guggenheim Foundation, the Harvard Academy for International and Area Studies, and the International Institute at UCLA for their financial support; and the staffs of the California Social Science Experimental Laboratory (CASSEL) at UCLA and the Center for International Studies and the Law School Library at USC. Extremely helpful comments were received from participants at the 9th meeting of the Laboratory in Comparative Ethnic Processes (LiCEP), University of Wisconsin, 7-8 May 2004.