IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/beh/jbepv1/v7y2023i1p25-33.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Testing Behaviors in the Play of an Expected Prisoner's Dilemma

Author

Listed:
  • Richard Arend

    (University of Southern Maine)

Abstract

We test the impact of a new form of game structure – the expected game – focusing on whether it improves the outcomes of a prisoner’s dilemma. An expected game is defined by the probability-weighted payoffs of two or more different reference or ‘bookend’ games. We analyze the impact of this structure and several relevant variants through a set of human subject-based experiments on non-na ̈ıve, consenting participants. As conjectured, we find that real play under this structure does decrease defection in a one-shot prisoner's dilemma game. Additionally, we find that such effects can be enhanced through framing and priming treatments. We discuss the micro-economic policy implications of our new results.

Suggested Citation

  • Richard Arend, 2023. "Testing Behaviors in the Play of an Expected Prisoner's Dilemma," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 7(1), pages 25-33, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:beh:jbepv1:v:7:y:2023:i:1:p:25-33
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://sabeconomics.org/journal/RePEc/beh/JBEPv1/articles/JBEP-7-1-3.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andreoni, James A & Miller, John H, 1993. "Rational Cooperation in the Finitely Repeated Prisoner's Dilemma: Experimental Evidence," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 103(418), pages 570-585, May.
    2. Ahmed, Ali M. & Salas, Osvaldo, 2011. "Implicit influences of Christian religious representations on dictator and prisoner's dilemma game decisions," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 242-246, May.
    3. Arthur Schram, 2005. "Artificiality: The tension between internal and external validity in economic experiments," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(2), pages 225-237.
    4. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    5. Chun-Lei Yang & Ching-Syang Jack Yue & I-Tang Yu, 2007. "The rise of cooperation in correlated matching prisoners dilemma: An experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(1), pages 3-20, March.
    6. Tullock, Gordon, 1999. "Non-prisoner's dilemma," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 455-458, July.
    7. Majeski, Stephen J., 1984. "Arms races as iterated prisoner's dilemma games," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 253-266, June.
    8. Brander, James A. & Spencer, Barbara J., 1985. "Export subsidies and international market share rivalry," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1-2), pages 83-100, February.
    9. Orbell, John M. & Wilson, L. A., 1978. "Institutional Solutions to the N-Prisoners' Dilemma," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 72(2), pages 411-421, June.
    10. Richard J. Arend & Darryl A. Seale, 2005. "Modeling alliance activity: an iterated prisoners' dilemma with exit option," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(11), pages 1057-1074, November.
    11. Herbert A. Simon & Massimo Egidi & Ricardo Viale & Robin Marris, 1992. "Economics, Bounded Rationality and the Cognitive Revolution," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 409.
    12. John Freebairn, 2008. "Some Sectoral and Global Distributional Issues in Greenhouse Gas Policy Design," Agenda - A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform, Australian National University, College of Business and Economics, School of Economics, vol. 15(1), pages 13-28.
    13. Giuseppe Attanasi & Aurora García-Gallego & Nikolaos Georgantzís & Aldo Montesano, 2015. "Bargaining over Strategies of Non-Cooperative Games," Games, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-26, August.
    14. Sabater-Grande, Gerardo & Georgantzis, Nikolaos, 2002. "Accounting for risk aversion in repeated prisoners' dilemma games: an experimental test," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 37-50, May.
    15. Richard J Arend, 2020. "The expected prisoner’s dilemma – With rationally arising cooperation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-6, September.
    16. Duffy, John & Ochs, Jack, 2009. "Cooperative behavior and the frequency of social interaction," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 785-812, July.
    17. Ken Binmore, 1994. "Game Theory and the Social Contract, Volume 1: Playing Fair," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262023636, December.
    18. William Shughart & Robert Tollison, 2005. "Public choice in the new century," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 124(1), pages 1-18, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Attanasi, Giuseppe & Garcia-Gallego, Aurora & Georgantzis, Nikolaos & Montesano, Aldo, 2011. "An Experiment on Prisoner’s Dilemma with Confirmed Proposals," LERNA Working Papers 11.23.357, LERNA, University of Toulouse.
    2. Attanasi, Giuseppe Marco & Garcia-Gallego, Aurora & Georgantzis, Nikolaos & Montesano, Aldo, 2011. "An Experiment on Prisoner’s Dilemma with Confirmed Proposals," TSE Working Papers 11-274, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    3. Eugenio Proto & Aldo Rustichini & Andis Sofianos, 2019. "Intelligence, Personality, and Gains from Cooperation in Repeated Interactions," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 127(3), pages 1351-1390.
    4. Johnsen, Åshild A. & Kvaløy, Ola, 2021. "Conspiracy against the public - An experiment on collusion11“People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the publ," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    5. Maier-Rigaud, Frank P. & Apesteguia, José, 2003. "The Role of Choice in Social Dilemma Experiments," Bonn Econ Discussion Papers 22/2003, University of Bonn, Bonn Graduate School of Economics (BGSE).
    6. Urs Fischbacher & Simon Gaechter, 2008. "Heterogeneous Social Preferences And The Dynamics Of Free Riding In Public Good Experiments," Discussion Papers 2008-07, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    7. Jonathan Shalev, 2002. "Loss Aversion and Bargaining," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 52(3), pages 201-232, May.
    8. Philip Streich & Jack S. Levy, 2007. "Time Horizons, Discounting, and Intertemporal Choice," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 51(2), pages 199-226, April.
    9. Urs Fischbacher & Simon Gachter, 2010. "Social Preferences, Beliefs, and the Dynamics of Free Riding in Public Goods Experiments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 541-556, March.
    10. Alexander Lenger & Stephan Wolf & Nils Goldschmidt, 2021. "Choosing inequality: how economic security fosters competitive regimes," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 19(2), pages 315-346, June.
    11. Giuseppe Garofalo, 2014. "Irreducible complexities: from Gödel and Turing to the paradigm of Imperfect Knowledge Economics," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 3463-3474, November.
    12. Goeschl, Timo & Jarke, Johannes, 2014. "Trust, but verify? When trustworthiness is observable only through (costly) monitoring," WiSo-HH Working Paper Series 20, University of Hamburg, Faculty of Business, Economics and Social Sciences, WISO Research Laboratory.
    13. Maximilian Andres, 2023. "Communication in the Infinitely Repeated Prisoner's Dilemma: Theory and Experiments," Papers 2304.12297, arXiv.org.
    14. Özalp Özer & Yanchong Zheng & Kay-Yut Chen, 2011. "Trust in Forecast Information Sharing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(6), pages 1111-1137, June.
    15. Pedro Dal Bó, 2005. "Cooperation under the Shadow of the Future: Experimental Evidence from Infinitely Repeated Games," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(5), pages 1591-1604, December.
    16. McCarter, Matthew W. & Rockmann, Kevin W. & Northcraft, Gregory B., 2010. "Is it even worth it? The effect of loss prospects in the outcome distribution of a public goods dilemma," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 111(1), pages 1-12, January.
    17. Proto, Eugenio & Rustichini, Aldo & Sofianos, Andis, 2014. "Higher Intelligence Groups Have Higher Cooperation Rates in the Repeated Prisoner's Dilemma," IZA Discussion Papers 8499, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    18. Todd Guilfoos & Andreas Pape, 2016. "Predicting human cooperation in the Prisoner’s Dilemma using case-based decision theory," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 80(1), pages 1-32, January.
    19. David Dequech, 2008. "Varieties of uncertainty: a survey of the economic literature," Anais do XXXVI Encontro Nacional de Economia [Proceedings of the 36th Brazilian Economics Meeting] 200807211223070, ANPEC - Associação Nacional dos Centros de Pós-Graduação em Economia [Brazilian Association of Graduate Programs in Economics].
    20. Ernesto Reuben & Sigrid Suetens, 2012. "Revisiting strategic versus non-strategic cooperation," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 15(1), pages 24-43, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    implied games; expected payoffs; prisoner's dilemma; microeconomic policy;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • C7 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory
    • C63 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Computational Techniques
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • L24 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Contracting Out; Joint Ventures

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:beh:jbepv1:v:7:y:2023:i:1:p:25-33. 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: SABE (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sabeeea.html .

    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.