Social Dilemma: Assessment of public campaign with different perspectives on the cost/benefit ratio.

Abstract

Prevention of diseases and conscientious voting are just two examples of the types of public campaigns that can be characterized by dealing with a problem that requires individual actions aimed at a solution for a social matter, in these cases the individual effort may represent more than the benefit consequent. Therefore they can be classified as a social dilemma. The present research focuses on two different types of relationship between effort and benefit: 1. elections: where the participation of citizens is essential because elections can only be considered legitimate - in a conceptual manner - if the electorate has critically skills in relation to their candidates, i.e., if they make an effort and dedication in the evaluation of candidates before voting, looking for the benefit of the construction of a socially good political representation; 2. public health issues were always great problems for the State. In most cases, the participation of citizens is essential to ensure the success of the action. Such participation would demand an individual effort to ensure a benefit to the group, i.e., not spreading the disease. Thus, we can consider this case as a special social dilemma, because there may be a (un)balance between personal and social gain. By means of a content analysis of past campaigns in these two areas, this research intends to assess how these two special issues have been addressed through public campaigns, from the theoretical proposals of social dilemmas.