2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.socec.2017.05.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Social preferences and cooperation in simple social dilemma games

Abstract: The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0
2

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
0
2
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…For the bot condition, we selected the same AI algorithm originally used by Karpus et al (2021) which proposed to play to be matched as player 1 to all the player 2 participants. This asynchronous, ex-ante pairing procedure is the same procedure employed by Karpus et al (2021) and in other experiments in economic game experiments (for example, Shapiro, 2009;Cox et al, 2017). Participants received a base payment of £1.50 for completing the study, an effective rate of £6 per hour in line with the minimum wage in the UK.…”
Section: Experimental Paradigmmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the bot condition, we selected the same AI algorithm originally used by Karpus et al (2021) which proposed to play to be matched as player 1 to all the player 2 participants. This asynchronous, ex-ante pairing procedure is the same procedure employed by Karpus et al (2021) and in other experiments in economic game experiments (for example, Shapiro, 2009;Cox et al, 2017). Participants received a base payment of £1.50 for completing the study, an effective rate of £6 per hour in line with the minimum wage in the UK.…”
Section: Experimental Paradigmmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, Messick (1967) terms experiments on games in which subjects interact simultaneously a "noncontrol method" and argues that CP are "a method by which means the experimenter can directly manipulate the nature of the dependence of one of the participants" (p. 34). Similarly, 10 CP have also been employed (i) to induce behavioral types in experimental tests of reputation models Ockenfels, 2005, Grosskopf andSarin, 2010), (ii) to investigate the impact of social status on learning in a coordination game (Eckel and Wilson, 2007), (iii) to isolate the impact of strategic uncertainty on subjects' ability to play a correlated equilibrium (Cason and Sharma, 2007), and to study the impact of social preferences in laboratory contests (Cox et al, 2017). I do not review these papers in greater detail.…”
Section: Aimsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A Tabela 3 mostra que há, consistentemente, condições antecedentes manipuladas nos estudos analisados: possibilidade de conversar antes e durante o experimento (Yip, Schweitzer, & Nurmohamed, 2018); informações sobre pertencer ou não a um grupo (Engelmann et al, 2018), ou seja, ser designado a um grupo específico antes de iniciar o experimento (Jordan et al, 2014) ou saber qual a nacionalidade do outro participante ; informações sobre as regras do jogo/tarefa (Parks et al, 2017); informações sobre qual será a escolha de outras pessoas (Gallo & Yan, 2015); perguntas sobre características pessoais do próprio participante antes de iniciar o jogo (Baader & Vostroknutov, 2017); informação sobre a possibilidade de o comportamento ser punido ou não no futuro (Grieco, Faillo, & Zarri, 2017); bem como presença de observadores . Uma mesma categoria nessa tabela pode indicar diferentes manipulações, como a categoria informações sobre o jogo/tarefa, que engloba manipulações que informaram aos participantes sobre a matriz de consequências (Hillenbrand & Winter, 2018), ou se o parceiro de jogo era o computador ou outra pessoa (Cox, Karam, & Murphy, 2017), ou mesmo sobre a quantidade de tentativas do jogo (Krockow, Colman, & Pulford, 2018), entre outras. Como esperado, devido aos critérios de inclusão dos artigos no levantamento bibliográfico, os estudos manipularam variáveis antecedentes sociais para avaliar a emergência e manutenção da cooperação.…”
Section: Manipulações Experimentais: Construção De História Antecedeunclassified