Win-win-win papakonstantinidis social dilemma

Research ON THE EQUILIBRIUM between what is best for individuals and what is best for collectives has long been central to sociology and other social sciences (Simpson and Willer, 2015). In explaining the sources of cooperation and prosocial behavior, psychologists, behavioral economists, and biologists often focus on factors internal to the individual, such as altruistic motives, preferences, and prosocial emotions. In contrast, sociologists emphasize social forces external to the individual, including norms, reputation systems, and social networks. Evidence for these norms, reputations, and relationships is reviewed, showing that they have strong and pervasive effects on cooperation and prosocial behavior. The scientific discussion highlights two emerging themes of the reviewed literature. First, although these categories of sociological mechanisms typically promote cooperation, their presence may also create ambiguity in individuals about the reasons for their own and others' prosocial actions, and this ambiguity may undermine future sociability in subsequent contexts where mechanisms are absent . Second, altruistic preferences and social mechanisms often interact, so that the causal importance of altruism is reduced where these mechanisms are present. As a social value orientation, win-win mainly reflects a situation where one actively considers and cares for others to pursue self-interest. Win-win is the realization of maximizing the interests of both sides, which is a harmonious development with mutual benefits. On the one hand, competition is not a zero-sum game, and the interests of different parties are so intertwined that the growth of one party often benefits others. damage to one party's interests will often spread to other parties at the same time. By improving the collaborative relationship between interrelated stakeholders, existing resources can be used more effectively or new resources can be developed to achieve the effect that one plus one is greater than two. In other words, all parties work together to "make the cake bigger" so they can get more benefits. In a psychological order "win-win-win" indicates legitimate and certain principles of governance Introduces "superego" in place of "individualism". From a psychological perspective, negotiation refers to any form of interaction in which people with different and conflicting interests communicate and discuss what steps they could take together to resolve their difference of opinion. The good negotiator has TWO in front of him and not one. This differentiation psychologically moves the negotiation to a level of empathy and community and effectively reduces the possibility of disagreement, or the collapse of the agreement, as evidenced by the two studies below From the unbridled A win-lose competition (John von Neumann) to win-win cooperation (JF Nash) and from there to humanism win-win-win (Papakonstantinidis) The psychological function on the personal level as an individual but on the collective as a citizen The "conflict" between the individual and the collective is expressed in "I win-you win-we win" (win-win-win) She the idea contributes to the functioning of negotiation in psychoanalytic therapy to reduce the effects of transference and countertransference The win-win-win involves three elements in one:  individualism-empathy-communitarianism.