The sound of cooperation: Musical influences on cooperative behavior

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/job.2128
• Author: Brian Wansink,Kevin M. Kniffin,William D. Schulze,Jubo Yan
• Published date: 01 March 2017
• Date: 01 March 2017

The sound of cooperation: Musical influences on

cooperative behavior

KEVIN M. KNIFFIN

1

*,JUBOYAN

2

, BRIAN WANSINK

1

AND WILLIAM D. SCHULZE

1

1

Cornell University, Dyson School of Applied Economics and Management, New York, U.S.A.

2

Division of Economics, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore

Summary Music as an environmental aspect of professional workplaces has been closely studied with respect to

consumer behavior while sparse attention has been given to its relevance for employee behavior. In this arti-

cle, we focus on the influence of music upon cooperative behavior within decision-making groups. Based on

results from two extended 20-round public goods experiments, we find that happy music significantly and

positively influences cooperative behavior. We also find a significant positive association between mood

and cooperative behavior. Consequently, while our studies provide partial support for the relevance of affect

in relation to cooperation within groups, we also show an independently important function of happy music

that fits with a theory of synchronous and rhythmic activity as a social lubricant. More generally, our findings

indicate that music and perhaps other atmospheric variables that are designed to prime consumer behavior

might have comparably important effects for employees and consequently warrant closer investigation.

Copyright © 2016 The Authors Journal of Organizational Behavior Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Keywords: music; cooperation; experimental economics; consumer behavior; organizational behavior

Musical resources are drawn upon for many uses. In retail establishments, for example, store managers and adver-

tisers are careful to play songs with the goal of encouraging behaviors and attitudes that are more likely to result in

greater sales (e.g., Munichor & Rafaeli, 2007; North & Hargreaves, 1998, 2003; North, Hargreaves, & McKendrick,

2000; Strick et al., 2015; Wansink & van Ittersum, 2012; Yalch, 1991). In sports, athletes tend to demonstrate

greater performance while reporting less exertion when competing with their favorite music (e.g., Karageorgh is &

Priest, 2012). And, in romantic relationships, the phrase “mood music”reflects a tradition of suitors using music

to woo the subjects of their affection (e.g., Miller, 2000).

In the same way that there are myriad reasons why people listen to music (e.g., Tarrant & No rth, 2000, 2001), it is

also clear that people do so in a wide variety of environmental settings. Rentfrow and Gosling (2003), for example,

report that people commonly listen to music when they are driving, reading, exercising, spending time with friends,

and when they are alone. Indeed, the pervasiveness with which music is played appears to contribute to it being

“taken-for-granted”(Suddaby et al., 2010) as part of the ambient environment. In our case, we are interested in

the potential for music to significantly influence cooperative behavior. Our interests are complementary to recent

findings that show the importance of an organization’s physical features for facilitating cooperative behavior

(e.g., Ashkanasy et al., 2014; Kniffin et al., 2015).

Among academic researchers, music has been closely studied for its marketing value in relation to its potential

influence upon consumer behavior (e.g., Bailey & Areni, 2006; Hui, Dube, & Chebat, 1997; Morin, Dube, &

Chebat, 2007); however, there has been sparse attention paid to the relevance of music for employee behavior

and managerial decision making. For example, a search of the subject indices for 10 popular Organizational

Behavior (OB) textbooks yields no entries for “music,”“musical,”or “song”(Champoux, 2011; Colquitt et al.,

2009; Gander, Haberberg, & Rieple, 2007; George & Jones, 2008; Griffin & Moorhead, 2007; Hitt et al., 2011;

*Correspondence to: Kevin M. Kniffin, Cornell University, Dyson School of Applied Economics and Management, Warren Hall 111, Ithaca, New

York 14853, U.S.A. E-mail: kmk276@cornell.edu

Copyright © 2016 The Authors Journal of Organizational Behavior

Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Received 24 March 2015

Revised 13 June 2016, Accepted 13 July 2016

Journal of Organizational Behavior, J. Organiz. Behav. 38, 372–390 (2017)

Published online 9 August 2016 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/job.2128

Research Article

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and

reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Johns & Saks, 2001; Kinicki & Kreitner, 2008; Luthans, 2008; McShane & Von Glinow, 2008; Robbins & Judge,

2011). Similarly, a keyword search within a sample of high-profile OB journals for “music”and “musical”generates

no results for the Academy of Management Journal while articles in the Journal of Organizational Behavior, Acad-

emy of Management Review, and Administrative Science Quarterly focus on music as an industry or activity (Albert

& Bell, 2002; Bougon et al., 1977; Dobrow, 2013; Faulkner & Runde, 2009; Greve, 1996; Hackman, 2003; Hirsch,

1975; Lingo & O’Mahony, 2010; Miner et al., 2001; Moorman & Miner, 1998; Peterson & Berger, 1971) instead of

considering music as a potential influence on contemporary workplaces. In a partial exception from that pattern,

Fritz et al. (2010) neither focus on music nor present empirical findings that involve music but they do nevertheless

acknowledge that employees often listen to music on the weekends as one among many tools for recovering from the

stresses of a regular workweek.

In this article, we review previous research concerning musical influences upon behavior, and we report the results

of two lab experiments that test for the specificinfluence of music upon cooperative behavior. As with other stimuli

that are designed to subtly influence behavior, our experiments are partly motivated by the fact that music is a work-

place feature that can be modified with relative ease and low cost. Indeed, while many retail establishments care-

fully select musical programs that are designed to influence consumers’behavior during shopping visits (Wansink

& van Ittersum, 2012), it is notable that the employees in those same workplaces are concurrently exposed to the

company’s musical selections during their shifts. We focus on studying cooperation given ample evidence that

workplace teams tend to benefit when co-workers cooperate with each other (e.g., Grant, 2013; Wilson & Kniffin,

2003). With specific respect to music, our interests are responsive to recent calls (e.g., Ashkanasy, Ayoko, &

Jehn, 2014; Elsbach & Pratt, 2007) to examine ways in which office atmospherics might influence employee

behavior.

Our studies draw upon two main theoretical frameworks that relate to understanding the relevance of environmen-

tal features on individual decision making within groups. Studies 1 and 2 each engage Dynamic Attending Theory

(DAT) (Escoffier et al., 2010; Jones & Boltz, 1989; Large & Jones, 1999) to examine whether the synchronous

activity of listening to rhythmic music will contribute significantly to cooperation while Study 2 applies

Affective Events Theory (AET) (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996) to test the question of whether mood—induced

by happy music—is significantly and positive associated with prosocial decisions. In their original introduction

of AET, Weiss and Cropanzano (1996, p. 40) catalogue a long list of environmental factors such as tempera-

ture, humidity, pollutants, and crowding that researchers have shown as important for influencing mood;

however, our focus on happy, rhythmic music offers a chance to concurrently consider AET alongside DAT.

More specifically, the intensive laboratory experiments that we present are designed to approximate workplace

environments in order to help us understand (i) whether happy music facilitates cooperative behavior among

co-workers and (ii) the extent to which (if any) the induction of positive mood might explain away the rele-

vance of the music.

Theoretical Background and Hypothesis Development

The physical design of professional workplaces has been understudied within OB (Johns, 2010). In their review of

the topic, Elsbach and Pratt (2007) reported mixed results while generally calling for more attention from

researchers. More recently, Ashkanasy et al. (2014) applied the framework of AET to consider the various ways

in which the physical space of workplaces can interact with social relationships. In their case, Ashkanasy and

co-authors called for researchers to consider questions such as whether “working in high-density open-plan

workspaces triggers affective reactions such as anger and frustration that then lead to negative attitudes and poor

work attitudes (low affective commitment)”(2014, p. 1180) . In related work, Kniffin et al. (2015) highlighted

the specific roles that workplace eateries (e.g., cafeterias, kitchens) can have upon cooperation among co-workers

and team-level performance. Considering the significant expenses that organizations incur for establishing and

THE SOUND OF COOPERATION 373

Copyright © 2016 The Authors Journal of Organizational Behavior

Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

J. Organiz. Behav. 38, 372–390 (2017)

DOI: 10.1002/job