In this blog post, we’ll explore how doing the right thing—while it may seem like a loss in the short term—can bring significant value and benefits in the long run.

Introduction

After graduating from high school and entering college, my daily life—including my lifestyle and eating habits—changed dramatically. Along with that, the nature of the assignments I had to complete also changed noticeably. Among these, group projects are something many college students experience for the first time. Group projects involve multiple people collaborating to complete a single piece of work, offering the potential for synergy that is difficult to achieve through individual assignments. They offer various benefits, such as solving problems creatively by sharing different perspectives and learning teamwork.
However, when actually working on group assignments, one realizes that there are quite a few cases of “free-riding”—where students do not properly participate in the assignment but simply have their names listed to receive credit. Such behavior is extremely selfish and causes serious harm to group members who have worked diligently on the assignment. I, too, have deep dissatisfaction with this free-riding, and I have pondered what methods could prevent it.
I have come up with two main strategies to prevent free-riding. First, issuing a warning about free-riding before group activities begin; second, excluding the student from group activities if free-riding is detected during the assignment. I will describe in detail below the reasons why these methods are effective and the rationale behind them, and I also intend to organize my thoughts on why we should live “correctly.”

Preventive Measures to Stop Free-Riding

To fundamentally prevent free-riding, it is crucial to first make students aware of why it is a problem. Before starting a group assignment, explain the negative impact free-riding has on teammates and give advance notice that strong measures will be taken to prevent it.
For example, showing interview videos or case studies of students who have experienced the harms of free-riding before the group assignment begins can instill a real sense of caution. If the professor also provides specific warnings in advance—such as “If free-riding is confirmed, the student will receive an F on the assignment and will not be allowed to retake the course”—students will be motivated to participate responsibly, even if only out of obligation.

Group Sanctions Against Free-Riders

If there are students who attempt to free-ride despite prior warnings, an institutional mechanism is needed whereby group members can consult with one another to report the student to the professor and exclude them from the assignment. This is not mere retaliation but a legitimate response to preserve a cooperative environment.
This approach can be explained by the “assortative interaction hypothesis” presented in the book *The Emergence of the Altruistic Human*. According to this hypothesis, altruistic people gather together to form cooperative groups, while selfish people harm one another and become isolated. Therefore, for a community to remain healthy, disciplinary action against members who undermine group cohesion is absolutely necessary.
The free-rider has, in effect, employed a strategy of betrayal within the small society of a group project. By expelling him from the team, the remaining members can maintain a cooperative strategy and create an environment conducive to successful project completion.

Why Should We Practice Proper Behavior?

This discussion naturally leads to the question, “Why should we live righteously?” According to the dictionary, “righteous” means “correct and in accordance with reason or norms.” I define “unrighteous behavior” as behavior that harms others, and conversely, “righteous behavior” as behavior that does not harm others or benefits them.
This raises the question: “Should we act in ways that benefit others even if they do not benefit ourselves?” While such behavior may seem inefficient in the short term, we must not overlook the fact that, from a long-term perspective, the benefits to society as a whole ultimately trickle back to the individual.
This can also be explained by the “group selection hypothesis” presented in ‘The Emergence of the Altruistic Human’. According to this hypothesis, groups that exhibit altruistic behavior are more likely to survive competition, and such traits gradually spread throughout society.
For example, suppose Group A consists of altruistic members who help and care for one another, while Group B consists of selfish members who pursue only their own interests. If these two groups compete, Group A is likely to have a higher survival rate and greater sustainability due to its greater stability and stronger cohesion. This serves as strong evidence that individual interests are linked to the interests of the group.

Conclusion: Long-term cooperation over short-term gain

To summarize, I have defined “right behavior” as actions that do not harm others or that benefit others. People generally do not hesitate to act when it benefits them as well. However, they tend to be skeptical of actions that do not immediately benefit them.
Nevertheless, the “birds of a feather flock together” hypothesis and the group selection hypothesis mentioned earlier support the idea that righteous behavior fosters a healthy group, which in turn benefits the individual in the long run. In other words, righteous behavior only becomes the foundation for social evolution when altruism and a sense of community are combined.
Therefore, regardless of whether there is a short-term benefit, I believe we have ample reason to practice righteous behavior—and indeed, we must do so.