Peer review and competition in the Art Exhibition Game

Abstract

Competition is an essential mechanism in increasing the effort and performance of human groups in real life. However, competition has side effects: it can be detrimental to creativity and reduce cooperation. We conducted an experiment called the Art Exhibition Game to investigate the effect of competitive incentives in environments where the quality of creative products and the amount of innovation allowed are decided through peer review. Our approach is general and can provide insights in domains such as clinical evaluations, scientific admissibility, and science funding. Our results show that competition leads to more innovation but also to more unfair reviews and to a lower level of agreement between reviewers. Moreover, competition does not improve the average quality of published works.

Document Details

Document Type
Pub Defense Publication
Publication Date
Jul 11, 2016
Source ID
10.1073/pnas.1603723113

Entities

People

  • Dirk Helbing
  • Robert L. Goldstone
  • Stefano Balietti

Organizations

  • Army Research Office
  • ETH Zurich
  • European Research Council
  • Harvard University
  • Indiana University
  • Northeastern University

Tags

Readers

  • Economics
  • Organizational Process Management (OPM).
  • Political Science/ International Relations/ European Studies