Jove
Visualize
Contact Us

Related Concept Videos

Robbers Cave04:49

Robbers Cave

14.9K
During the 1950s, the landmark Robbers Cave experiment demonstrated that when groups must compete with one another, intergroup conflict, hostility, and even violence may result. At the Oklahoman summer camp, two troops of boys—termed the Rattlers and the Eagles—took part in a week-long tournament. During this time, their negativity culminated in derogatory name-calling, fistfights, and even vandalism and destruction of property. However, this work also revealed that such tension...
14.9K
Reason and Intuition01:37

Reason and Intuition

7.6K
The human brain processes information for decision-making using one of two routes: an intuitive system and a rational system (Epstein, 1994; popularized by Kahneman, 2011 as System 1 and System 2, respectively). The intuitive system is quick, impulsive, and operates with minimal effort, relying on emotions or habits to provide cues for what to do next, while the rational system is logical, analytical, deliberate, and methodical. Research in neuropsychology suggests that the...
7.6K
Impact of Individuals on a Group01:25

Impact of Individuals on a Group

381
In social psychology, the interplay between individuals and groups is a central concern, particularly regarding how individual actions and characteristics influence group processes and outcomes. While much research emphasizes the group's power in shaping individual behavior, it is equally significant to understand how individuals contribute to the functioning, development, and success of groups.Individual Roles in Group Productivity and Decision-MakingIndividuals are not passive participants in...
381
Groupthink01:34

Groupthink

50.2K
When in group settings, we are often influenced by the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors around us. Groupthink is another phenomenon of conformity where modification of the opinions of members in a group aligns with what they believe is the group consensus (Janis, 1972). In such situations, the group often takes action that individuals would not perform outside the group setting because groups make more extreme decisions than individuals do. Moreover, groupthink can hinder opposing trains of...
50.2K
Social Loafing01:37

Social Loafing

39.8K
Another way in which a group presence can affect performance is social loafing—the exertion of less effort by a person working together with a group. Social loafing occurs when our individual performance cannot be evaluated separately from the group. Thus, group performance declines on easy tasks (Karau & Williams, 1993). Essentially individual group members loaf and let other group members pick up the slack. Because each individual’s efforts cannot be evaluated,...
39.8K
Social Foundations of Self II: The Generalized Other01:20

Social Foundations of Self II: The Generalized Other

292
According to George Herbert Mead, as children progress beyond the game stage, they develop a more comprehensive understanding of societal rules and norms. This cognitive and social development enables them to internalize the expectations of the broader community, refining their ability to regulate behavior.Consistent participation in organized activities is crucial in helping children recognize that their actions are not isolated but contribute to a more significant, interconnected group...
292

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same journal

The Ant and the Grasshopper: Does Biased Cognition Compromise Agency in the Case of Delusions and Conspiracy Theories?

Review of philosophy and psychology·2025
Same journal

Desire and Motivation in Predictive Processing: An Ecological-Enactive Perspective.

Review of philosophy and psychology·2025
Same journal

Causal Conditionals, Tendency Causal Claims and Statistical Relevance.

Review of philosophy and psychology·2025
Same journal

Conceptual Spaces for Conceptual Engineering? Feminism as a Case Study.

Review of philosophy and psychology·2025
Same journal

Category Mistakes Electrified.

Review of philosophy and psychology·2024
Same journal

Subjectivity and Non-Objectifying Awareness.

Review of philosophy and psychology·2024
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Feb 26, 2026

The Collective Trust Game: An Online Group Adaptation of the Trust Game Based on the HoneyComb Paradigm
06:18

The Collective Trust Game: An Online Group Adaptation of the Trust Game Based on the HoneyComb Paradigm

Published on: October 20, 2022

2.6K

Team Reasoning and Collective Intentionality.

Björn Petersson1

  • 1Department of Philosophy, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.

Review of Philosophy and Psychology
|July 21, 2017
PubMed
Summary

This study examines team reasoning in game theory, arguing that existing theories by Bratman and Tuomela fail to capture the necessary "agency transformation." It proposes a new framework for understanding the collective "we-perspective" crucial for team reasoning.

Area of Science:

  • Philosophy of Mind
  • Game Theory
  • Social Psychology

Background:

  • Standard game theory often faces puzzles stemming from individualism about agency.
  • Collectivistic game theorists like Michael Bacharach offer formal frameworks to address these dilemmas.
  • Philosophers of collective action, such as Raimo Tuomela, explore agent motivation in overcoming social dilemmas.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the conditions necessary for Michael Bacharach's "team reasoning" to occur.
  • To critically evaluate Michael Bratman's and Raimo Tuomela's theories of collective action in relation to team reasoning.
  • To propose an alternative framework for understanding the collective "we-perspective" required for team reasoning.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of existing theories on shared intention and collective action, specifically Bratman's and Tuomela's.

More Related Videos

The HoneyComb Paradigm for Research on Collective Human Behavior
06:48

The HoneyComb Paradigm for Research on Collective Human Behavior

Published on: January 19, 2019

9.9K
Exploring the Role of Deontic Reasoning and World Knowledge in Wason´s Selection Task
06:08

Exploring the Role of Deontic Reasoning and World Knowledge in Wason´s Selection Task

Published on: July 22, 2025

1.0K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Feb 26, 2026

The Collective Trust Game: An Online Group Adaptation of the Trust Game Based on the HoneyComb Paradigm
06:18

The Collective Trust Game: An Online Group Adaptation of the Trust Game Based on the HoneyComb Paradigm

Published on: October 20, 2022

2.6K
The HoneyComb Paradigm for Research on Collective Human Behavior
06:48

The HoneyComb Paradigm for Research on Collective Human Behavior

Published on: January 19, 2019

9.9K
Exploring the Role of Deontic Reasoning and World Knowledge in Wason´s Selection Task
06:08

Exploring the Role of Deontic Reasoning and World Knowledge in Wason´s Selection Task

Published on: July 22, 2025

1.0K
  • Conceptual critique of how these theories address the "agency transformation" inherent in team reasoning.
  • Development of a novel framework to functionally characterize the collective perspective within intentional states.
  • Main Results:

    • Neither Bratman's nor Tuomela's influential theories adequately capture the "agency transformation" essential for team reasoning.
    • This finding presents a challenge for Tuomela's claim that Bacharach's work supports his theory.
    • An alternative framework is proposed, understanding the collective perspective through the distinction between mode and content of intentional states.

    Conclusions:

    • The proposed framework offers a more philosophically robust background for understanding team reasoning.
    • It re-evaluates the nature of the collective perspective and its role in overcoming social dilemmas.
    • Discusses implications for Tuomela's view on the rational choice of switching between individual and collective perspectives.