Social Learning Strategies and Cooperative Behaviour: Evidence of Payoff Bias, but Not Prestige or Conformity, in a Social Dilemma Game

Human cooperation, occurring without reciprocation and between unrelated individuals in large populations, represents an evolutionary puzzle. One potential explanation is that cooperative behaviour may be transmitted between individuals via social learning. Using an online social dilemma experiment, we find evidence that participants’ contributions were more consistent with payoff-biased transmission than prestige-biased transmission or conformity. We also found some evidence for lower cooperation (i) when exposed to social information about peer cooperation levels than without such information, and (ii) in the prisoners’ dilemma game compared to the snowdrift game. A simulation model established that the observed cooperation was more likely to be caused by participants’ general propensity to cooperate than by the effect of social learning strategies employed within the experiment, but that this cooperative propensity could be reduced through selection. Overall, our results support previous experimental evidence indicating the role of payoff-biased transmission in explaining cooperative behaviour, but we find that this effect was small and was overwhelmed by participants’ general propensity for cooperation.

When face masks signal social identity: Explaining the deep face-mask divide during the COVID-19 pandemic

With the COVID-19 pandemic still raging and the vaccination program still rolling out, there continues to be an immediate need for public health officials to better understand the mechanisms behind the deep and perpetual divide over face masks in America. Using a random sample of Americans (N = 615), following a pre-registered experimental design and analysis plan, we first demonstrated that mask wearers were not innately more cooperative as individuals than non-mask wearers in the Prisoners’ Dilemma (PD) game when information about their own and the other person’s mask usage was not salient. However, we found strong evidence of in-group favouritism among both mask and non-mask wearers when information about the other partner’s mask usage was known. Non-mask wearers were 23 percentage points less likely to cooperate than mask wearers when facing a mask-wearing partner, and 26 percentage points more likely to cooperate than mask wearers when facing a non-mask-wearing partner. Our analysis suggests social identity effects as the primary reason behind people’s decision whether to wear face masks during the pandemic.

Cooperation in the Time of Coronavirus: When Wearing Face Masks Signals More Than Just Willingness to Cooperate and Comply

With the COVID-19 pandemic still raging and the vaccination program still rolling out, there continues to be an immediate need for public health officials to better understand the mechanisms behind the deep and perpetual divide over face masks in America. Using a random sample of Americans (N=615), following a pre-registered experimental design and analytic plan, we first demonstrated that mask wearers were not innately more cooperative as individuals than non-mask wearers in the Prisoners’ Dilemma (PD) game when information about their own and the other person’s mask usage was not salient. However, we found strong, revealed preference evidence of in-group favoritism among both mask and non-mask wearers when information about the other partner’s mask usage was known. Holding other things constant, non-mask wearers were 23 percentage points less likely to cooperate than mask wearers when facing a mask-wearing partner, and 26 percentage points more likely to cooperate than mask wearers when facing a non-mask wearing partner. Our analysis suggests social identity effects to be one of the main drivers of people’s decision whether to wear or shun face masks during the pandemic. Policy makers should therefore take social perception of face masks into account when designing not only what public messages to deliver, but also who to deliver these messages.

The Prisoners’ Dilemma in collaborative carriers’ request selection

Logistics providers have to utilize available capacities efficiently in order to cope with increasing competition and desired quality of service. One possibility to reduce idle capacity is to build coalitions with other players on the market. While the willingness to enter such coalitions does exist in the logistics industry, the success of collaborations strongly depends on mutual trust and behavior of participants. Hence, a proper mechanism design, where carriers do not have incentives to deviate from jointly established rules, is needed. We propose to use a combinatorial auction system, for which several properties are already well researched but little is known about the auction’s first phase, where carriers have to decide on the set of requests offered to the auction. Profitable selection strategies, aiming at maximization of total collaboration gains, do exist. However, the impact on individual outcomes, if one or more players deviate from jointly agreed selection rules is yet to be researched. We analyze whether participants in an auction-based transport collaboration face a Prisoners’ Dilemma. While it is possible to construct such a setting, our computational study reveals that carriers do not profit from declining the cooperative strategy. This is an important and insightful finding, since it further strengthens the practical applicability of auction-based trading mechanisms in collaborative transportation.