What harvesters really think about in commons dilemma simulations: A grounded theory analysis.

Verbal protocols and structured interviews were conducted with 16 Ss (11 undergraduates, 3 graduate students, 1 computer technician, and 1 high school student) to investigate decision making in a simulated commons dilemma. Grounded theory was used to identify motivational and cognitive mediators of harvest choices. The core category that emerged from the analysis was labeled goal satisficing. Most Ss adopted or formulated specific harvest goals prior to and during the simulation. These goals guided decision-making, influencing strategies, and ultimately how many points were harvested. Five action strategies used to pursue goals were identified: developing initial harvest plans, monitoring pool size and others' harvests, developing expectancies about others, simulating possible outcomes, and strategic influence. Results suggest that defection (resource overuse) occurs in commons dilemmas for 2 main reasons: a failure to adopt cooperative goals, or a failure to implement effective action strategies after such goals are adopted. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)