In this blog post, we’ll explore ways to solve the free-rider problem in group projects based on the reciprocal-iterative hypothesis and the conditional cooperation strategy (TFT), as well as why we should live our lives with integrity.
When taking multiple classes in college, students often find themselves working on group assignments. This is a common teaching method—so much so that there’s even a saying, “College = Group Projects (Team Play)”—because it offers various benefits, such as the synergy and brainstorming that occur when people come together. However, throughout the process, various problems constantly arise, including conflicts among group members, difficulties in dividing roles, and free-riding, where some members fail to properly fulfill their assigned tasks. In the context of group projects, “free-riding” refers to the behavior of some members failing to fulfill their roles while other group members are doing their best to complete the assignment. From here on, I will suggest ways to reduce such free-riding and make group activities more effective, and furthermore, I’d like to explore why we should live ethically.
Before that, the book ‘The Emergence of Altruistic Humans’ introduces several hypotheses regarding how humans who engage in altruistic behavior—even at their own expense—have managed to survive to this day. Among these, I will focus on aspects of the conditional cooperation strategy proposed by the “Reciprocal Altruism” hypothesis to suggest ways to reduce free-riding in group projects.
First, the group activities discussed in this paper are based on the assumption of group assignments typically conducted in college classes. The proposed solution is to obtain the consent of all team members before beginning the assignment. In other words, the assignment begins only after all members have agreed to carry it out according to the TFT strategy—that is, a conditional cooperation strategy. The TFT (Tit for Tat) strategy, which means “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth,” is a strategy in which one cooperates if the other cooperates, and defects if the other defects. It is called a “conditional cooperation strategy” because one continues to cooperate as long as the other maintains a cooperative attitude, but ceases cooperation if the other stops cooperating.
So, how can this strategy reduce free-riding in group projects? As explained earlier, free-riding in group projects refers to the behavior of some group members failing to fulfill their roles while others do their best to complete the assignment. However, if all team members share the TFT strategy, the moment someone starts free-riding, the other team members will also stop cooperating. Ultimately, one person’s free-riding leads to a collapse of cooperation across the entire team, potentially resulting in the entire group being late or failing to submit the assignment by the deadline. In a team where everyone betrays the others, it becomes difficult to carry out group assignments normally.
Conversely, the very fact that a deliverable of a certain quality has been completed and submitted implies that all team members cooperated. On the other hand, teams where free-riding occurs are highly likely to submit work of lower quality. Therefore, from the instructor’s perspective, this approach can be expected to have a certain benefit in that it allows for a clearer evaluation of the entire team’s level of cooperation and participation based on the final deliverable.
Group activities have three characteristics. First, they are not one-time events but rather activities that occur repeatedly over a certain period. Second, the benefits gained through these activities last longer than the duration of the activity itself. Third, there is a clearly defined end point for the activity. The Interaction-Repetition Hypothesis explains that cooperative behavior is more likely to be sustained when interactions are repeated among the same participants. Group activities at universities also continue for periods ranging from a few weeks to an entire semester. Furthermore, the grades earned as a result can have an impact even after graduation. Considering these factors, students may be motivated to cooperate actively now for the sake of greater future benefits.
However, given that the end point of the activity is fixed, the problem of so-called “backward induction” may arise. Once the final stage is reached, since there will be no future situations requiring cooperation, some students may conclude that free-riding is in their best interest. If that is the case, why shouldn’t we act as free-riders even when we have every opportunity to do so? From here on, I would like to share my thoughts on why people should not free-ride and why we should live righteously.
I consider the reasons for living righteously from two perspectives. First, we should not do to others what we would find unpleasant if done to us. This aligns with the spirit of “putting oneself in another’s shoes,” a concept everyone has heard of at least once. It also resonates with the teaching in ‘Chai Jindan’ (Treatise on Cultivating the Heart), written by Hong Zicheng, a scholar of China’s Ming Dynasty: “The consequences of good and bad deeds will inevitably return to oneself.” Furthermore, this moral imperative can be explained through Kant’s moral philosophy. Kant believed that, as rational beings, humans can choose actions that transcend their own desires based on free will, and that such choices inevitably entail responsibility. From this perspective, moral laws are established, and the TFT strategy—which involves reciprocating cooperation or betrayal based on the other party’s actions—also aligns well with the principle of “putting oneself in another’s shoes.” Ultimately, there is a valid reason to live morally.
The second reason is to satisfy the desire for self-actualization and self-development. Free-riding is behavior that relies on the efforts of others rather than one’s own abilities. This amounts to acknowledging one’s own lack of ability and, at the same time, giving up opportunities for personal growth. According to the hierarchy of needs theory proposed by American psychologist Maslow, human motivation develops as various levels of needs are sequentially satisfied, with the need for self-actualization at the very top. Free-riding is no different from voluntarily giving up this opportunity for self-actualization. Therefore, it is desirable to develop one’s abilities and achieve self-actualization through altruistic cooperative behavior, thereby ultimately fulfilling one’s own needs.
In this paper, I proposed a solution: if all team members collectively practice the TFT strategy—cooperating when teammates cooperate and defecting when teammates defect—we can complete group assignments more successfully. I also examined why free-riding should be avoided, even though group activities have a clear end point and thus carry a risk of free-riding. I believe that any rational human being—and anyone seeking self-actualization—should live a righteous life.
