I study why some groups---polities and organizations alike---sustain independent judgment while others fall into conformity traps. Social approval can suppress not only the expression of independent judgment but also the upstream practice that keeps such judgment available: maintaining judgment generates visible questioning, and observers cannot distinguish diligence from opposition. Because suspicion falls when questioning is common, the same desire for approval can sustain a questioning culture or a conformity trap. The model separates maintaining judgment from acting on it when novelty arrives. When the decision to act is uniquely determined, I give primitive conditions for coexistence; in a logit--proportional benchmark, a single inequality is necessary and sufficient. The principal contribution is dynamic. Under staggered revision the stock of judgment is inherited: protecting dissent releases existing judgment at once---with negative expected adaptive value on impact in a stationary culture below a break-even competence threshold---whereas rebuilding the stock is constrained by turnover. A monotone operator constructs the extremal perfect-foresight paths from every inherited state. When recovery under every admissible continuation is attainable, two cutoffs classify inherited states---recovery impossible, expectation-dependent, or assured---and a focus condition at the unstable culture strictly separates them, opening a band of states where expectations select the long-run culture. Turnover then yields sharp physical duration bounds, within temporary direct formation support, for making recovery possible or robust. A fully coupled interval-certified example verifies coexistence, the band, and the distinct output and welfare implications.
An institution that cannot compel disclosure can still allocate exposure. We study two opposed advocates who select verifiable observations and a receiver who averages the selected record without correcting for selection. The institution commits exposure before the state and evidence are known; each withheld item's ass...
Peer review is commonly treated as a mechanism of quality control. This article examines what happens when participants are split between two groups. Explicators assess whether submissions present logic-based arguments (whether deductive, inductive or abductive), independently of whether they agree with the reasons or...
Real-time triadic mediation is developed: an institutional model in which an AI system supplies simultaneous, source-grounded framework analysis to both parties in an emerging dispute, before positions harden.
Since the pioneering work of Lizzeri and Persico (2001), it has been well known that, in winner-take-all systems, office-motivated politicians may favor targeted redistribution over the provision of public goods. Motivated by the possibility that similar incentives may arise even in small organizations, we examine a...
Francesco de Sinopoli, G. Iannantuoni, Diego Lubian· Public Choice· 0 citations