ReviewFrontiers in psychology2025
Exploring individual and organizational factors influencing cooperation in commons: a scoping review.
Review in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Cultural evolution in the laboratory: evolution of cooperative altruistic punishing.Evolutionary human sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Today, humanity faces multiple social and environmental crises that have arguably been caused by mainstream modes of economic organization. Against this background, commons represent a promising, viable alternative that enables people to self-organize to satisfy their needs in a more sustainable way. However, for commons to be successful, their members must cooperate. Despite the importance of cooperation for commoning processes, few studies in the scientific field of the commons have investigated cooperation using an individual-centered approach. To fill this knowledge gap, we conducted a scoping review to gather existing research about individual cooperation. We sought to identify factors that can impact cooperation in commons. We used a keyword search in three online databases to identify papers of interest. For inclusion, papers had to measure cooperation as an outcome variable, assess the impact of one or more factors on cooperation, use adult participants, and be written in English. The application of these criteria led to the inclusion of 135 papers. The included papers enabled us to identify nine factors influencing cooperation that could be divided into two categories. The first category includes individual factors, which depend on individuals' characteristics. These factors are: gender, social status, group identification, values and personality traits, and trust. The second category includes organizational factors, which concern the way individuals are organized as a group. These are: incentives, communication, social norms, and anonymity. We discuss these results vis-à-vis previous commons literature, showing that an individual perspective could significantly improve our understanding of how commons work. Moreover, we highlight the implications of the current review for future field research in commons.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.