Literature DB >> 28592673

Evidence for strategic cooperation in humans.

Maxwell N Burton-Chellew1,2, Claire El Mouden3, Stuart A West3,2.   

Abstract

Humans may cooperate strategically, cooperating at higher levels than expected from their short-term interests, to try and stimulate others to cooperate. To test this hypothesis, we experimentally manipulated the extent an individual's behaviour is known to others, and hence whether or not strategic cooperation is possible. In contrast with many previous studies, we avoided confounding factors by preventing individuals from learning during the game about either pay-offs or about how other individuals behave. We found clear evidence for strategic cooperators-just telling some individuals that their groupmates would be informed about their behaviour led to them tripling their initial level of cooperation, from 17 to 50%. We also found that many individuals play as if they do not understand the game, and their presence obscures the detection of strategic cooperation. Identifying such players allowed us to detect and study strategic motives for cooperation in novel, more powerful, ways.
© 2017 The Author(s).

Entities:  

Keywords:  altruism; confusion; rationality; reputation; signalling

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28592673      PMCID: PMC5474078          DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2017.0689

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Biol Sci        ISSN: 0962-8452            Impact factor:   5.349


  24 in total

1.  False-positive psychology: undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant.

Authors:  Joseph P Simmons; Leif D Nelson; Uri Simonsohn
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2011-10-17

2.  Development of cooperative relationships through increasing investment.

Authors:  G Roberts; T N Sherratt
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1998-07-09       Impact factor: 49.962

3.  Social learning and the demise of costly cooperation in humans.

Authors:  Maxwell N Burton-Chellew; Claire El Mouden; Stuart A West
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2017-04-26       Impact factor: 5.349

4.  Social heuristics shape intuitive cooperation.

Authors:  David G Rand; Alexander Peysakhovich; Gordon T Kraft-Todd; George E Newman; Owen Wurzbacher; Martin A Nowak; Joshua D Greene
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2014-04-22       Impact factor: 14.919

5.  Cues of being watched enhance cooperation in a real-world setting.

Authors:  Melissa Bateson; Daniel Nettle; Gilbert Roberts
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2006-09-22       Impact factor: 3.703

6.  Cooperation through indirect reciprocity: image scoring or standing strategy?

Authors:  M Milinski; D Semmann; T C Bakker; H J Krambeck
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2001-12-07       Impact factor: 5.349

7.  Cooperators benefit through reputation-based partner choice in economic games.

Authors:  Karolina Sylwester; Gilbert Roberts
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2010-04-21       Impact factor: 3.703

8.  Prosocial preferences do not explain human cooperation in public-goods games.

Authors:  Maxwell N Burton-Chellew; Stuart A West
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2012-12-17       Impact factor: 11.205

9.  Powering up with indirect reciprocity in a large-scale field experiment.

Authors:  Erez Yoeli; Moshe Hoffman; David G Rand; Martin A Nowak
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2013-06-10       Impact factor: 11.205

10.  Reflection does not undermine self-interested prosociality.

Authors:  David G Rand; Gordon T Kraft-Todd
Journal:  Front Behav Neurosci       Date:  2014-09-03       Impact factor: 3.558

View more
  5 in total

1.  A preference to learn from successful rather than common behaviours in human social dilemmas.

Authors:  Maxwell N Burton-Chellew; Victoire D'Amico
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2021-12-22       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Advertising cooperative phenotype through costly signals facilitates collective action.

Authors:  Martin Lang; Radim Chvaja; Benjamin Grant Purzycki; David Václavík; Rostislav Staněk
Journal:  R Soc Open Sci       Date:  2022-05-24       Impact factor: 3.653

3.  Payoff-based learning best explains the rate of decline in cooperation across 237 public-goods games.

Authors:  Maxwell N Burton-Chellew; Stuart A West
Journal:  Nat Hum Behav       Date:  2021-05-03

4.  Misrepresentation of group contributions undermines conditional cooperation in a human decision making experiment.

Authors:  Pieter van den Berg; Siyuan Liu; Tom Wenseleers; Jianlei Zhang
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-07-19       Impact factor: 4.996

5.  Evolution of conditional cooperation in public good games.

Authors:  Balaraju Battu; Narayanan Srinivasan
Journal:  R Soc Open Sci       Date:  2020-05-13       Impact factor: 2.963

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.