A field experiment on intertemporal enforcement spillovers

Enforcement can affect compliance directly and indirectly, through spillovers. We study intertemporal enforcement spillovers by conducting a randomized field experiment in a university exam. The initial phase of the experiment is the exam itself. We induce variation in enforcement by randomly assigning students to rooms with different monitoring levels. The second phase is post-exam. In this phase, all students are subject to the same low level of monitoring. Our outcome variable is the probability that students steal a pen in the post-exam phase. We find that enforcement in the exam phase has a strong intertemporal spillover on compliance in the post-exam phase: students subject to a high monitoring level in the initial phase are about 33% less likely to steal the pen than students subject to low initial monitoring.     

The wisdom of the minority

We consider a simple variant of the canonical model of social learning and show that in many situations it is optimal for an agent to abandon her own information and follow the minority rather than the majority. This possibility depends on two economically meaningful requirements: agents are differentially informed and observe only the number of agents having chosen each option, such as consumers observing only market shares. We show that minority wisdom arises when information is sufficiently heterogeneous and the well informed are not overly abundant, yet the conditions necessary are not overly restrictive. In fact, it is possible for the minority to be wise even when the minority consists of a lone dissenter and a majority of citizens are well informed.     

Within-person variation in affective commitment to teams: Where it comes from and why it matters

Teamwork is crucial to organizational success and commitment to teams is an important predictor of team-related behaviors. However, theorists and researchers have typically assumed that commitment levels are generally stable within-persons, increasing or decreasing as a result of substantial organizational changes. This position is at odds with the evidence of systematic and regular intraindividual fluctuations in personal attributes and workplace behaviors. We draw upon affective events theory to present a model explaining how certain events and dispositions produce vacillations in affective reactions which, in turn, are likely to create within-person variation in affective commitment to teams (WPVC_teams). We further propose that WPVC_teams enhances prediction and explanation of intraindividual fluctuations in work behavior and, interindividually, moderates the relationship between level of commitment and behavior.