IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jgames/v2y2011i1p21-51d11252.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Intergroup Prisoner’s Dilemma with Intragroup Power Dynamics

Author

Listed:
  • Ion Juvina

    (Department of Psychology, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA)

  • Christian Lebiere

    (Department of Psychology, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA)

  • Jolie M. Martin

    (Dynamic Decision Making Laboratory, Social and Decision Sciences, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA)

  • Cleotilde Gonzalez

    (Dynamic Decision Making Laboratory, Social and Decision Sciences, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA)

Abstract

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Ion Juvina & Christian Lebiere & Jolie M. Martin & Cleotilde Gonzalez, 2011. "Intergroup Prisoner’s Dilemma with Intragroup Power Dynamics," Games, MDPI, vol. 2(1), pages 1-31, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jgames:v:2:y:2011:i:1:p:21-51:d:11252
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4336/2/1/21/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4336/2/1/21/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ido Erev & Eyal Ert & Alvin E. Roth, 2010. "Erev, I. et al . A Choice Prediction Competition for Market Entry Games: An Introduction. Games 2010, 1 , 117-136," Games, MDPI, vol. 1(3), pages 1-5, July.
    2. Tyran, Jean-Robert, 2003. "Behavioral Game Theory. Experiments in Strategic Interaction: Colin F. Camerer, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 2003, p. 550, Price $65.00/[UK pound]42.95, ISBN 0-691-09039-4," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 717-720, December.
    3. Putnam, Robert D., 1988. "Diplomacy and domestic politics: the logic of two-level games," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 42(3), pages 427-460, July.
    4. Gary Bornstein, 2002. "Intergroup conflict: Individual, group and collective interests," Discussion Paper Series dp297, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
    5. Erev, Ido & Roth, Alvin E, 1998. "Predicting How People Play Games: Reinforcement Learning in Experimental Games with Unique, Mixed Strategy Equilibria," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(4), pages 848-881, September.
    6. Ido Erev & Eyal Ert & Alvin E. Roth, 2010. "A Choice Prediction Competition for Market Entry Games: An Introduction," Games, MDPI, vol. 1(2), pages 1-20, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Changkun Zhao & Ryan Kaulakis & Jonathan H. Morgan & Jeremiah W. Hiam & Frank E. Ritter & Joesph Sanford & Geoffrey P. Morgan, 2015. "Building social networks out of cognitive blocks: factors of interest in agent-based socio-cognitive simulations," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 115-149, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wei Chen & Shu-Yu Liu & Chih-Han Chen & Yi-Shan Lee, 2011. "Bounded Memory, Inertia, Sampling and Weighting Model for Market Entry Games," Games, MDPI, vol. 2(1), pages 1-13, March.
    2. Ori Plonsky & Yefim Roth & Ido Erev, 2021. "Underweighting of rare events in social interactions and its implications to the design of voluntary health applications," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(2), pages 267-289, March.
    3. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:2:p:267-289 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Ioannou, Christos A. & Romero, Julian, 2014. "A generalized approach to belief learning in repeated games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 178-203.
    5. Chmura, Thorsten & Goerg, Sebastian J. & Selten, Reinhard, 2012. "Learning in experimental 2×2 games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 44-73.
    6. Naoki Watanabe, 2022. "Reconsidering Meaningful Learning in a Bandit Experiment on Weighted Voting: Subjects’ Search Behavior," The Review of Socionetwork Strategies, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 81-107, April.
    7. W Chen & Y Chen & D Levine, 2015. "A Unifying Learning Framework for Building Artificial Game-Playing Agents," Levine's Working Paper Archive 786969000000001002, David K. Levine.
    8. repec:cup:judgdm:v:17:y:2022:i:5:p:1043-1057 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Anufriev, Mikhail & Kopányi, Dávid & Tuinstra, Jan, 2013. "Learning cycles in Bertrand competition with differentiated commodities and competing learning rules," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 37(12), pages 2562-2581.
    10. Kazuhiro Miyagawa & Tadanobu Misawa & Tetsuya Shimokawa, 2011. "The role of the orbitofrontal cortex in human adaptive learning under strategic environments," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 31(3), pages 2284-2297.
    11. repec:cup:judgdm:v:8:y:2013:i:3:p:214-235 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Eric Guerci & Nobuyuki Hanaki & Naoki Watanabe, 2017. "Meaningful learning in weighted voting games: an experiment," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 83(1), pages 131-153, June.
    13. Eyal Ert & Ido Erev & Alvin E. Roth, 2011. "A Choice Prediction Competition for Social Preferences in Simple Extensive Form Games: An Introduction," Games, MDPI, vol. 2(3), pages 1-20, July.
    14. Xiaoyang Long & Javad Nasiry & Yaozhong Wu, 2020. "A Behavioral Study on Abandonment Decisions in Multistage Projects," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(5), pages 1999-2016, May.
    15. Wang, Yongjie & Yao, Zhouzhou & Wang, Chao & Ren, Jiale & Chen, Qiao, 2020. "The impact of intelligent transportation points system based on Elo rating on emergence of cooperation at Y intersection," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 370(C).
    16. Luke Lindsay, 2011. "Correlated Individual Differences and Choice Prediction," Games, MDPI, vol. 2(1), pages 1-5, February.
    17. Eyal Ert & Ido Erev, 2013. "On the descriptive value of loss aversion in decisions under risk: Six clarifications," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 8(3), pages 214-235, May.
    18. Alan Kirman & François Laisney & Paul Pezanis-Christou, 2018. "Exploration vs Exploitation, Impulse Balance Equilibrium and a specification test for the El Farol bar problem," School of Economics and Public Policy Working Papers 2018-11, University of Adelaide, School of Economics and Public Policy.
    19. Silvia Angerer & E. Glenn Dutcher & Daniela Glätzle-Rützler & Philipp Lergetporer & Matthias Sutter, 2021. "The Formation of Risk Preferences through Small-Scale Events," CESifo Working Paper Series 9270, CESifo.
    20. Levy, Nadav & Klein, Ido & Ben-Elia, Eran, 2018. "Emergence of cooperation and a fair system optimum in road networks: A game-theoretic and agent-based modelling approach," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 46-55.
    21. repec:cup:judgdm:v:15:y:2020:i:2:p:266-281 is not listed on IDEAS
    22. Ido Erev & Alvin E. Roth & Robert Slonim, 2016. "Minimax across a population of games," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 2(2), pages 144-156, November.
    23. Ofir Yakobi & Doron Cohen & Eitan Naveh & Ido Erev, 2020. "Reliance on small samples and the value of taxing reckless behaviors," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(2), pages 266-281, March.
    24. Lindner, Florian, 2014. "Decision time and steps of reasoning in a competitive market entry game," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 122(1), pages 7-11.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jgames:v:2:y:2011:i:1:p:21-51:d:11252. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.