Literature DB >> 33833291

Free neighborhood choice boosts socially optimal outcomes in stag-hunt coordination problem.

Arno Riedl1,2,3,4, Ingrid M T Rohde5,6, Martin Strobel7.   

Abstract

Situations where independent agents need to align their activities to achieve individually and socially beneficial outcomes are abundant, reaching from everyday situations like fixing a time for a meeting to global problems like climate change agreements. Often such situations can be described as stag-hunt games, where coordinating on the socially efficient outcome is individually optimal but also entails a risk of losing out. Previous work has shown that in fixed interaction neighborhoods agents' behavior mostly converges to the collectively inefficient outcome. However, in the field, interaction neighborhoods often can be self-determined. Theoretical work investigating such circumstances is ambiguous in whether the efficient or inefficient outcome will prevail. We performed an experiment with human subjects exploring how free neighborhood choice affects coordination. In a fixed interaction treatment, a vast majority of subjects quickly coordinates on the inefficient outcome. In a treatment with neighborhood choice, the outcome is dramatically different: behavior quickly converges to the socially desirable outcome leading to welfare gains 2.5 times higher than in the environment without neighborhood choice. Participants playing efficiently exclude those playing inefficiently who in response change their behavior and are subsequently included again. Importantly, this mechanism is effective despite that only few exclusions actually occur.

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 33833291     DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-87019-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Rep        ISSN: 2045-2322            Impact factor:   4.379


  13 in total

1.  A dynamic model of social network formation.

Authors:  B Skyrms; R Pemantle
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2000-08-01       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Inequality, communication, and the avoidance of disastrous climate change in a public goods game.

Authors:  Alessandro Tavoni; Astrid Dannenberg; Giorgos Kallis; Andreas Löschel
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-07-05       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  The effects of reputational and social knowledge on cooperation.

Authors:  Edoardo Gallo; Chang Yan
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-03-09       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Dynamic social networks promote cooperation in experiments with humans.

Authors:  David G Rand; Samuel Arbesman; Nicholas A Christakis
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-11-14       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 5.  Human cooperation.

Authors:  David G Rand; Martin A Nowak
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2013-07-13       Impact factor: 20.229

6.  Co-evolution of behaviour and social network structure promotes human cooperation.

Authors:  Katrin Fehl; Daniel J van der Post; Dirk Semmann
Journal:  Ecol Lett       Date:  2011-04-04       Impact factor: 9.492

7.  Locally noisy autonomous agents improve global human coordination in network experiments.

Authors:  Hirokazu Shirado; Nicholas A Christakis
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2017-05-17       Impact factor: 49.962

8.  Cooperation and assortativity with dynamic partner updating.

Authors:  Jing Wang; Siddharth Suri; Duncan J Watts
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2012-08-17       Impact factor: 11.205

9.  Cooperation, clustering, and assortative mixing in dynamic networks.

Authors:  David Melamed; Ashley Harrell; Brent Simpson
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-01-16       Impact factor: 11.205

10.  Strong links promote the emergence of cooperative elites.

Authors:  Edoardo Gallo; Yohanes E Riyanto; Tat-How Teh; Nilanjan Roy
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-07-26       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.