Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byFrancis Leslie Stevenson Modified over 9 years ago
1
How the Emotions Enforce the Cooperative Behavior in Social Dilemma Games Speaker :林 家 仰
2
Before start The main contents in this speech are discussing Prof. Ernesto Reuben’s paper and using the materials in his courses http://ereuben.googlepages.com/home
3
Outline What’s experimental economics? A very brief history Neuroeconomics Public goods Punishment Emotions
4
What’s experimental economics? A discipline in which data are collected in a controlled environment.
5
A Brief History Market experiments Decentralized markets Chamberlin (1948) induced demand and cost structure Double auction Vernon Smith (1962, 1964) Game experiments Prisoners‘dilemma 1950’s Originally by psychologists and sociologists Oligopoly games Reinhard Selten(1959) Individual choice experiments Choice under uncertainty Savage (1954) Allais paradox (1953)
6
Why experimental method Advantages of the experiments Control Institutions (e.g. voting rules, communication, etc.) Not always complete control (e.g. social norms) Incentives (payoffs) Not always complete control (e.g. altruism) Measure confounding variables (e.g. beliefs) Randomization (avoids some self-selection problems) Replication Check for robustness, experimenter effects, etc. Gives an incentive to do it right Make available: data, instructions, program, and procedures
7
Importance Economics is becoming an experimental science like physics and biology. Like theory, running experiments is an established method to explain and/or describe economic activity.
8
Neuroeconomics See lecture 1 on Prof. Ernesto Reuben’s web site http://ereuben.googlepages.com/expteach
9
Public Goods Real-world problems of cooperation Cooperative hunting and warfare Teamwork in firms Charities and gift-giving Environmental protection Economic public goods Paying taxes Fishing Security Political collective action Voting Lobbying Revolutions
10
The voluntary contributions mechanism (VCM) The profit of each subject endowment: e i Contribute to public account: c i Contributions to the public good benefit each member by: α i (marginal per capita return, MPCR) Group of n members
11
Reasons for cooperation By mistake! Do not understand that c i = 0 is dominant Do understand dominance but make systematic errors Social preferences Altruism, warm glow, efficiency-seeking motives Conditional cooperation, reciprocity Strategic cooperation Strategies such as Tit-for-Tat can support cooperation among selfish players mostly infinitely repeated games but see also Kreps et al. (1982)
12
By mistake Cooperating by Mistake Brandts et al. 2004 Design VCM: n= 4, e= 9, repeated for 10 periods 72 subjects, within subjects On every period the MPCR is randomly drawn from 10 values MPCR ≤0.1875: efficient ci= 0, dominant strategy ci= 0 0.3125 ≤MPCR ≤0.9375: efficient ci= 9, dominant strategy ci= 0 MPCR ≥1.0625:efficient ci= 9, dominant strategy ci= 9
13
By mistake Result
14
Conditional Cooperation Conditional or unconditional cooperation? Fischbacher & Gächeter 2006 Design 140 subjects, within subjects VCM: n= 4, e= 20, MPCR = 0.4 2 stages: strategy method and normal Decisions 1: unconditional contribution decision Decision 2: use strategy method to elicit contribution schedule with respect to average contribution of decision 1 Pick randomly three decision 1’s and one decision 2 Predictions Altruism or ‘warm glow’: contribution is positive but independent of others contribution Reciprocity: contribution increases with the average contribution of others Selfish: always contribute zero
15
Conditional Cooperation Results Little unconditional cooperation Heterogeneity in types : 55% conditional cooperators 23% selfish 12% ‘hump- shape’contributors 10% other
16
Strategic cooperation Is there strategic cooperation? Keser& van Winden2000 Compare partners vs. strangers If partners cooperate more → supports strategic cooperation? Design VCM: n= 4, e= 10, 25 periods, MPCR = 0.5 160 subjects between subjects Results Strong effect of the partner’s treatment
17
Explaining the decline in cooperation Croson 1996 Why does cooperation decline with time Strategic cooperation Learning to play the dominant strategy Design: surprise restart VCM: n= 4, e= 25, MPCR = 0.5 Repeated 10 + 10 periods 24 subjects Results Clear evidence of restart specially for partners
18
Punishment The effectiveness of punishment Nikiforakis and Normann 2006 Results Punishment sustains cooperation with a damage/cost ratio greater than 2/1 Punishment increases welfare with a damage/cost ratio greater than 3/1
19
To punish or not to punish Sanfreyet al. 2003 Results Higher activation in anterior insulafor unfair human offers Activation is higher with degree of unfairness
20
Results Higher activation in anterior insulafor unfair human offers Activation is higher with degree of unfairness Activation is highest with rejection Higher activation in right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex Not sensitive to rejection
21
Emotions Prosocial emotions Hopfensitz and Reuben 2006 For punishment to be effective: Punished subjects should switch to cooperation Punished subjects should not punish back Design Trust game with ‘infinite’ rounds of punishment (costs 1 to reduce 4) 2 periods, perfect strangers emotions are measured before making decisions
22
Measurement of Emotions Is self reports a good idea ? experimental economists self reports is sometimes regarded with suspicion (Smith and Walker, 1993) self reports will often overstate the true amount that individuals are will-ing to pay (Murphy et al., 2005)
23
Measurement of Emotions Social psychology emotions are internal, difficult to observe states, self reports of emotions are an often used technique (Robinson and Clore, 2002) self reports of anger have been related to skin conductance levels for emotional reactions in the power to take game (Ben-Shakhar et al., 2007 self reported are indeed reliable can be deduced from a recent neuroimaging study (Takahashi et al., 2004)
24
Measurement of Emotions measured emotions included: anger, gratitude, guilt, happiness, irritation, shame, and surprise.
25
Results first movers cooperate more often and second movers return more in the presence of punishment
27
Results 2 nd movers cooperate after being punished only if they feel guilt
28
Results 2 nd movers cooperate after being punished only if they feel guilt
29
Results Considerable retaliation after receiving punishment 40% of second movers punish back if punished 2 nd movers retaliate because: They are angry and feel no guilt
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.