Intergroup Prisoner’s Dilemma with Intragroup Power
نویسندگان
چکیده
The Intergroup Prisoner’s Dilemma with Intragroup Power Dynamics (IPD^2) is a new game paradigm for studying human behavior in conflict situations. IPD^2 adds the concept of intragroup power to an intergroup version of the standard Repeated Prisoner’s Dilemma game. We conducted a laboratory study in which individual human participants played the game against computer strategies of various complexities. The results show that participants tend to cooperate more when they have greater power status within their groups. IPD^2 yields increasing levels of mutual cooperation and decreasing levels of mutual defection, in contrast to a variant of Intergroup Prisoner’s Dilemma without intragroup power dynamics where mutual cooperation and mutual defection are equally likely. We developed a cognitive model of human decision making in this game inspired by the Instance-Based Learning Theory (IBLT) and implemented within the ACT-R cognitive architecture. This model was run in place of a human participant using the same paradigm as the human study. The results from the model show a pattern of behavior similar to that of human data. We conclude with a discussion of the ways in which the IPD^2 paradigm can be applied to studying human behavior in conflict situations. In particular, we present the current study as a possible contribution to corroborating the conjecture that democracy reduces the risk of wars.
منابع مشابه
Intergroup Prisoner's Dilemma with Intragroup Power Dynamics and Individual Power Drive
The Intergroup Prisoner’s Dilemma with Intragroup Power Dynamics (IPD^2) is a new game paradigm for studying human behavior in conflict situations. IPD^2 adds the concept of intragroup power to an intergroup version of the standard Repeated Prisoner’s Dilemma game. We conducted a laboratory study in which individual human participants played the game against computer strategies of various compl...
متن کاملThe Prisoner’s Dilemma as a Two-Level Game: An Experimental Investigation
This paper extends the literature on individual versus group decision-making by combining a strategic inter-group game with an intra-group voting mechanism. The intergroup game is a simple Prisoners’ Dilemma, while we consider two versions of an intragroup voting mechanism—a form of representative democracy and a majority vote. Our results suggest that players tend to be more cooperative in the...
متن کاملEmbedding Social Dilemmas in Intergroup Competition Reduces Free-Riding
We study a class of multi-level collective actions in which each individual is simultaneously engaged in an intragroup conflict and intergroup competition. The intragroup conflict is modeled as an n-person Prisoner’s Dilemma game in which the dominant strategy is to contribute nothing. The intergroup competition is for an exogenous and commonly known prize shared by members of the winning group...
متن کاملA New Game Paradigm
What motivates individual self-sacrificial behavior in intergroup conflicts? Is it the altruistic desire to help the in-group or the aggressive drive to hurt the outgroup? This article introduces a new game paradigm, the intergroup prisoner’s dilemma–maximizing difference (IPD-MD) game, designed specifically to distinguish between these two motives. The game involves two groups. Each group memb...
متن کاملIntragroup social influence and intergroup competition.
Three experiments examined the role of intragroup social influence in intergroup competition. In the context of a mutual fate control situation, participants in Experiment 1 demonstrated more intergroup competition in the presence than in the absence of social support for shared self-interest. Experiment 2 revealed that, in the context of a Prisoner's Dilemma Game, this social support effect wa...
متن کامل