WHAT HARVESTERS REALLY THINK ABOUT IN COMMONS DILEMMA SIMULATIONS - AGROUNDED THEORY ANALYSIS

Verbal protocols and structured interviews were collected to investiga te decision making in a simulated commons dilemma. Grounded theory was used to identify the main motivational and cognitive mediators of har vest choices during the simulation. The core category that emerged fro m the analysis was labeled goal satisficing. Most participants adopted or formulated specific harvest goals prior to and during the simulati on. These goals guided decision-making, influencing which strategies w ere employed, and ultimately how many points were harvested from the p ool on each trial. Five action strategies that participants used to pu rsue their goals were identified: developing initial harvest plans, mo nitoring pool size and others' harvests, developing expectancies about others, simulating possible outcomes, and strategic influence. The re sults suggest that defection (resource overuse) occurs in commons dile mmas for two main reasons: a failure to adopt cooperative goals, or a failure to implement effective action strategies after such goals are adopted.