Heuristics guide the implementation of social preferences in one-shot Prisoner's Dilemma experiments

Cooperation in one-shot anonymous interactions is a widely documented aspect of human behaviour. Here we shed light on the motivations behind this behaviour by experimentally exploring cooperation in a one-shot continuous-strategy Prisoner's Dilemma (i.e. one-shot two-player Public Goods Game). We examine the distribution of cooperation amounts, and how that distribution varies based on the benefit-to-cost ratio of cooperation (b/c). Interestingly, we find a trimodal distribution at all b/c values investigated. Increasing b/c decreases the fraction of participants engaging in zero cooperation and increases the fraction engaging in maximal cooperation, suggesting a role for efficiency concerns. However, a substantial fraction of participants consistently engage in 50% cooperation regardless of b/c. The presence of these persistent 50% cooperators is surprising, and not easily explained by standard models of social preferences. We present evidence that this behaviour is a result of social preferences guided by simple decision heuristics, rather than the rational examination of payoffs assumed by most social preference models. We also find a strong correlation between play in the Prisoner's Dilemma and in a subsequent Dictator Game, confirming previous findings suggesting a common prosocial motivation underlying altruism and cooperation.

[1]  J. Tedeschi,et al.  Matrix indices and strategy choices in mixed-motive games , 1967 .

[2]  A. Rapoport,et al.  Prisoner's Dilemma: A Study in Conflict and Co-operation , 1970 .

[3]  R. Trivers The Evolution of Reciprocal Altruism , 1971, The Quarterly Review of Biology.

[4]  W. Hamilton,et al.  The evolution of cooperation. , 1984, Science.

[5]  M. Nowak,et al.  Tit for tat in heterogeneous populations , 1992, Nature.

[6]  G. Brady Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action , 1993 .

[7]  G Gigerenzer,et al.  Reasoning the fast and frugal way: models of bounded rationality. , 1996, Psychological review.

[8]  D. Levine Modeling Altruism and Spitefulness in Experiments , 1998 .

[9]  E. Fehr A Theory of Fairness, Competition and Cooperation , 1998 .

[10]  P. Todd,et al.  Simple Heuristics That Make Us Smart , 1999 .

[11]  Gary E. Bolton,et al.  ERC: A Theory of Equity, Reciprocity, and Competition , 2000 .

[12]  M. Rabin,et al.  Understanding Social Preference with Simple Tests , 2001 .

[13]  T. Yamagishi,et al.  Social exchange and reciprocity: confusion or a heuristic? , 2000, Evolution and human behavior : official journal of the Human Behavior and Evolution Society.

[14]  D. Kahneman A perspective on judgment and choice: mapping bounded rationality. , 2003, The American psychologist.

[15]  D. Fudenberg,et al.  Emergence of cooperation and evolutionary stability in finite populations , 2004, Nature.

[16]  Ying-yi Hong,et al.  Dynamic Influences of Culture on Cooperation in the Prisoner's Dilemma , 2005, Psychological science.

[17]  C. Hauert,et al.  Models of cooperation based on the Prisoner's Dilemma and the Snowdrift game , 2005 .

[18]  BÓ Pedrodal,et al.  Cooperation under the Shadow of the Future : Experimental Evidence from Infinitely Repeated Games , 2005 .

[19]  N. Chater,et al.  Game relativity: how context influences strategic decision making. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[20]  M. Nowak Evolutionary Dynamics: Exploring the Equations of Life , 2006 .

[21]  M. Nowak Five Rules for the Evolution of Cooperation , 2006, Science.

[22]  M. Nowak,et al.  Evolution of cooperation by multilevel selection. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[23]  C. Hauert,et al.  Synergy and discounting of cooperation in social dilemmas. , 2006, Journal of theoretical biology.

[24]  T. Yamagishi,et al.  The Social Exchange Heuristic: Managing Errors in Social Exchange , 2007 .

[25]  David G. Rand,et al.  Winners don’t punish , 2008, Nature.

[26]  S. Gächter Behavioral Game Theory , 2008, Encyclopedia of Evolutionary Psychological Science.

[27]  M. Crockett The Neurochemistry of Fairness , 2009, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[28]  David G. Rand,et al.  Direct reciprocity with costly punishment: generous tit-for-tat prevails. , 2009, Journal of theoretical biology.

[29]  David G. Rand,et al.  The online laboratory: conducting experiments in a real labor market , 2010, ArXiv.

[30]  Panagiotis G. Ipeirotis,et al.  Running Experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk , 2010, Judgment and Decision Making.

[31]  David G. Rand,et al.  Slow to Anger and Fast to Forgive: Cooperation in an Uncertain World , 2010 .

[32]  G. Spagnolo,et al.  Equilibrium Selection in the Repeated Prisoner's Dilemma: Axiomatic Approach and Experimental Evidence , 2011 .

[33]  David G. Rand,et al.  Who Cooperates in Repeated Games: The Role of Altruism, Inequity Aversion, and Demographics , 2011 .

[34]  Jason P. Mitchell,et al.  Equitable decision making is associated with neural markers of intrinsic value , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[35]  Manfred Milinski,et al.  The Calculus of Selfishness , 2011 .

[36]  Hans-Theo Normann,et al.  A Within-Subject Analysis of Other-Regarding Preferences , 2010, Games Econ. Behav..

[37]  Guillaume Fréchette,et al.  The Evolution of Cooperation in Infinitely Repeated Games: Experimental Evidence , 2011 .

[38]  David G. Rand,et al.  The promise of Mechanical Turk: how online labor markets can help theorists run behavioral experiments. , 2012, Journal of theoretical biology.

[39]  David G. Rand,et al.  Direct reciprocity in structured populations , 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[40]  Nadine Fleischhut,et al.  Cooperation in risky environments: Decisions from experience in a stochastic social dilemma , 2012, CogSci.

[41]  David G. Rand,et al.  Economic Games on the Internet: The Effect of $1 Stakes , 2011, PloS one.

[42]  N. Christakis,et al.  Social Networks and Cooperation in Hunter-Gatherers , 2011, Nature.

[43]  Torsten Röhl,et al.  An economic experiment reveals that humans prefer pool punishment to maintain the commons , 2012, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[44]  David G. Rand,et al.  Spontaneous giving and calculated greed , 2012, Nature.

[45]  David G. Rand,et al.  Religious motivations for cooperation: an experimental investigation using explicit primes , 2014 .

[46]  Jason P. Mitchell,et al.  Intuitive Prosociality , 2013 .

[47]  Guillaume Fréchette,et al.  Strategy Choice in the Infinitely Repeated Prisoners’ Dilemma , 2015, American Economic Review.

[48]  David G. Rand,et al.  Human cooperation , 2013, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[49]  Andreas Lange,et al.  Prisoners and their dilemma , 2013 .

[50]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  Cooperative Equilibria in Iterated Social Dilemmas , 2013, SAGT.

[51]  Valerio Capraro,et al.  A Model of Human Cooperation in Social Dilemmas , 2013, PloS one.

[52]  David G. Rand,et al.  Why We Cooperate , 2014 .

[53]  David G. Rand,et al.  Cooperating with the future , 2014, Nature.

[54]  David G. Rand,et al.  Who Cooperates in Repeated Games: The Role of Altruism, Inequity Aversion, and Demographics , 2011 .

[55]  Kalliopi Mylona,et al.  Benevolent Characteristics Promote Cooperative Behaviour among Humans , 2014, PloS one.

[56]  David G. Rand,et al.  Social Context and the Dynamics of Cooperative Choice , 2014 .

[57]  N. McGlynn Thinking fast and slow. , 2014, Australian veterinary journal.

[58]  Valerio Capraro,et al.  Do good actions inspire good actions in others? , 2014, Scientific Reports.

[59]  David G. Rand,et al.  Social heuristics shape intuitive cooperation , 2014, Nature Communications.

[60]  David G. Rand,et al.  Humans display a ‘cooperative phenotype’ that is domain general and temporally stable , 2014, Nature Communications.

[61]  David G. Rand,et al.  What Does 'Clean' Really Mean? The Implicit Framing of Decontextualized Experiments , 2013 .

[62]  David G. Rand,et al.  Humans Display a 'Cooperative Phenotype' that is Domain General and Temporally Stable , 2014 .

[63]  David G. Rand,et al.  Reflection does not undermine self-interested prosociality , 2014, Front. Behav. Neurosci..

[64]  Valerio Capraro,et al.  Group Size Effect on Cooperation in One-Shot Social Dilemmas , 2014, ArXiv.

[65]  David G. Rand,et al.  The Collective Benefits of Feeling Good and Letting Go: Positive Emotion and (dis)Inhibition Interact to Predict Cooperative Behavior , 2014, PloS one.

[66]  David G. Rand,et al.  It's the thought that counts: The role of intentions in reciprocal altruism * , 2013 .

[67]  C. Engel,et al.  When is the risk of cooperation worth taking? The prisoner’s dilemma as a game of multiple motives , 2013 .