Table 2.

The influence of peers on the perceptions of social norms (study 2)

ConditionRating of appropriateness of destructive choices in the Joy of Destruction gameaDestructive choices rated as appropriate (binary)b
All subjectsAll subjects
All estimatesEstimates of the modal rating (task 1)Estimates of ratings of 10 other subjects (task 2)All estimatesEstimates of the modal rating (task 1)Estimates of ratings of 10 other subjects (task 2)
OTHER*DESTRUCTIVE PEER0.07**0.10*0.07**0.04**0.060.04**
[0.01][0.07][0.02][0.03][0.16][0.04]
OTHERc−0.03**−0.04−0.03*−0.02*−0.03−0.02
[0.05][0.26][0.05][0.10][0.26][0.11]
DESTRUCTIVE PEERd0.030.000.030.04*0.050.03*
[0.29][1.00][0.23][0.07][0.14][0.07]
No. of observations8,8068167,9908,8068167,990
DESTRUCTIVE PEER in OTHER0.10***0.10**0.10***0.08***0.11***0.08***
[0.00][0.03][0.00][0.00][0.00][0.00]
  • We controlled for gender and school grade. SEs are clustered on a subject level. Ordinary least-squares; P values appear in brackets.

  • a The dependent variable is the appropriateness rating of destructive choice in the Joy of Destruction game ranging from −1 (very socially inappropriate) to +1 (very socially appropriate).

  • b The dependent variable is equal to +1 if subjects rated a destructive choice as socially appropriate (somewhat, quite, or very).

  • c OTHER indicates that the experimental counterpart was a member of a different ethnic group (Roma), rather than a coethnic.

  • d DESTRUCTIVE PEER indicates that the destructive choice was made after observing a destructive peer instead of in isolation.

  • *** P < 0.01.

  • ** P < 0.05.

  • * P < 0.1.