Acceso usuarios
Patricia Andrew, Friedrich M. Götz
Seeing a situation as a zero-sum game, where one party’s success must come at the expense of another, stifles cooperation—even when such cooperation could greatly benefit both parties. Consequently, zero-sum beliefs can undermine progress when cooperation is needed for success. In this article, we propose that zero-sum thinking (any specific instance of zero-sum construals or beliefs) can also be understood as a broader mindset—a generalized belief about how the world works. Thus, the zero-sum mindset predisposes one toward zero-sum thinking, and its cognitive and strategic consequences, across situations and domains. In an investigation spanning six countries (Belgium, India, Italy, Pakistan, the United Kingdom, and United States) on three continents, and more than 10,000 unique participants, we use cross-sectional, longitudinal, and experimental methods to provide foundational evidence for the zero-sum mindset. In Studies 1–5 (Concept), we show that the zero-sum mindset is distinct from existing concepts, stable over time, and predictive of disparate instances of zero-sum thinking and its strategic implications across domains and cultures. In Studies 6–7 (Cognitions), we show that zero-sum configurations of success promote hostile interpretations of others and that the zero-sum mindset predicts this bias even in objectively non-zero-sum situations. In Studies 8–9 (Consequences), we show that the zero-sum mindset predicts lower cooperation even in situations where cooperation is a matter of life or death. These findings call attention to the way lay game theories such as the zero-sum mindset bear critical implications for the cognitions and attitudes that drive social behavior and success. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)
