Problem 8 - Cooperation Flashcards
games
-interaction between 2 or more agents each of whom have 2 or more strategies available (which are associated with payoffs that depend on the action of the other person)
Prisoner’s dilemma
- cooperation
- nash equilibrium
- both silent -> one year
- both betray each other -> 5
- only one talks -> 10 for one
Public goods game
- everyone gets money
- each individual decides how much to contribute to the pool
- > pool is later divided and given back
- best collectively rational strategies is to contribute
- best individual strategy is not to contribute
Dictator game
- 2 anonymous players are allotted a sum of money in a one shot interaction
- Player 1 decides how to divide the money between the two
- Player 2 receives allocation, game ends
- pure measure of intrinsic motivation for equal offers
ultimatum game
- 2 anonymous players are allotted a sum of money
- Player 1 decides how to divide the money between the two
- Player 2 accepts/rejects possible offers before hearing the actual offer
- If he/she doesn’t accept, no one gets anything
- both players know in advance the consequences of accepting/rejecting
Third-party punishment game ??
- 2 anonymous players are allotted a sum of money
- Player 1 decides how to divide the money
- Player 2 has no choice
- Player 3 ?
Evolution of cooperation
-downing strategy
factors influencing extent of cooperation (7)
1) consideration of others
2) empathy
3) fear
4) differences in values
5) Trust
6) Generosity
7) Communication
consideration of others - cooperation
- less cooperation when it was known that the other cooperated (from 37% to 16%)
- thinking harder about a task reduces cooperation (more likely to behave fairly when less capacity for thinking)
Empathy
-critical for social functioning and promotes prosocial behavior
-empathic failures
-empathy alone may be insufficient to produce pro-social behavior (esp. when parties differ in status/power)
-
Fear
- of being taken for a sucker (too nice) / being punished for acting in self-interest
- fear is removed -> behave in a greedy fashion
- greed -> stronger effect on behavior than fear
- observing a fair player being punished -> pain-related brain areas are activated
differences in values
- categorization of social value orientation
1) prosocial -> maximise joint gains , equality in outcomes
2) individualists -> maximise own gains
3) competitors -> maximise relative gain - values can be learned
- social values orientations are based on our attachment style, family background, age and experience
trust - key word
- trust leads to increased cooperation
- more likely to trust people with good reputation
- emotions affect trust ratings of others (except for family members)
moralistic punishment
- fosters group cooperation
- punishment of non-cooperators -> motivates them to cooperate
Antisocial punishment
-key word
- punishment of high cooperators
- > destabilizes group cooperation and reduces beneficial effects of moralistic punishment
- to stop high co-operators from looking too good
- force them to cooperate less
- to stop the antisocial punisher from looking selfish in comparison
- the stronger the rule of law/strong norms of civic cooperation = less antioscial punishment
antisocial punishment: do-gooder derogation
- putting down of morally motivated others
- people who help others get criticized and ridiculed for their efforts
- prevents escalation of generosity
- risky tactic as it can make oneself look bad if done poorly
normative theory
punishment of all deviators no matter in which direction
biological markets theory
- organisms can choose partners for cooperative interactions
- > best partners are most able, willing, and available to provide benefits in cooperative interactions
- organisms outbid each other to be chosen as partners
nash equilibrium
- two or more players
- > each player is assumed to know the equilibrium strategies of the other players
- > no player has anything to gain by changing only their own strategy