IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/apmaco/v410y2021ics0096300321005348.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reducing the bystander effect via decreasing group size to solve the collective-risk social dilemma

Author

Listed:
  • Jiang, Luo-Luo
  • Gao, Jian
  • Chen, Zhi
  • Li, Wen-Jing
  • Kurths, Jürgen

Abstract

Collective cooperation is essential to human society, and it exists in many social dilemmas. In the scenario of a collective-risk social dilemma, a group of players have to collectively contribute to a public fund to prevent the tragedy of the commons, such as dangerous climate change, because everybody will lose all their remaining money when the damage happens with a certain probability if the group fails to reach a fixed fundraising target. Yet, it remains largely unclear how the group size affects the probability of reaching the collective target and the mechanism that drives different outcomes of the collective cooperation. Here, we contribute to the literature by exploring the role of group size in the collective-risk social dilemma and the potential underlying mechanism using both model simulations and human experiments. Through simulations we found that the rate of failure for collective cooperation increases for larger groups, along with the arising of bystander effect and a decrease in average contributions, which are confirmed by our experimental observations. We further analyze the patterns of investment behaviors in the experiment setting by categorizing players into cooperators, altruists, and free riders using both a clustering method and a golden standard. We found that altruists who tend to contribute more, rather than cooperators who prefer contributing a fair-share investment, play a crucial role in groups with success outcome in early and/or middle stages of the game. Our results indicate that bystanders are dynamic and their amount depends on the contribution of others. When others contribute less, bystanders also contribute less. If the collective goal is unlikely to achieve, more players choose to be bystanders who strategically contribute less, intriguing the failure of the collective goal. Our findings suggest a potentially effective way to solve the collective-risk social dilemma by reducing the bystander effect through the mechanism design of forming small groups.

Suggested Citation

  • Jiang, Luo-Luo & Gao, Jian & Chen, Zhi & Li, Wen-Jing & Kurths, Jürgen, 2021. "Reducing the bystander effect via decreasing group size to solve the collective-risk social dilemma," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 410(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:apmaco:v:410:y:2021:i:c:s0096300321005348
    DOI: 10.1016/j.amc.2021.126445
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0096300321005348
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.amc.2021.126445?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Huck, Steffen & Normann, Hans-Theo & Oechssler, Jorg, 2004. "Two are few and four are many: number effects in experimental oligopolies," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 53(4), pages 435-446, April.
    2. Dhakal, Sandeep & Chiong, Raymond & Chica, Manuel & Middleton, Richard H., 2020. "Climate change induced migration and the evolution of cooperation," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 377(C).
    3. Francisco C. Santos & Marta D. Santos & Jorge M. Pacheco, 2008. "Social diversity promotes the emergence of cooperation in public goods games," Nature, Nature, vol. 454(7201), pages 213-216, July.
    4. Tavoni, Alessandro & Dannenberg, Astrid & Kallis, Giorgos & Löschel, Andreas, 2011. "Inequality, communication and the avoidance of disastrous climate change," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 37570, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. Henrik Orzen, 2008. "Counterintuitive number effects in experimental oligopolies," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 11(4), pages 390-401, December.
    6. He, Nanrong & Chen, Xiaojie & Szolnoki, Attila, 2019. "Central governance based on monitoring and reporting solves the collective-risk social dilemma," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 347(C), pages 334-341.
    7. Ernst Fehr & Simon Gächter, 2002. "Altruistic punishment in humans," Nature, Nature, vol. 415(6868), pages 137-140, January.
    8. Maria Abou Chakra & Arne Traulsen, 2012. "Evolutionary Dynamics of Strategic Behavior in a Collective-Risk Dilemma," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(8), pages 1-7, August.
    9. Szolnoki, Attila & Chen, Xiaojie, 2020. "Blocking defector invasion by focusing on the most successful partner," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 385(C).
    10. Christian Hilbe & Laura Schmid & Josef Tkadlec & Krishnendu Chatterjee & Martin A. Nowak, 2018. "Indirect reciprocity with private, noisy, and incomplete information," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 115(48), pages 12241-12246, November.
    11. Li, Wen-Jing & Jiang, Luo-Luo & Perc, Matjaž, 2021. "A limited mobility of minorities facilitates cooperation in social dilemmas," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 391(C).
    12. Manfred Milinski & Torsten Röhl & Jochem Marotzke, 2011. "Cooperative interaction of rich and poor can be catalyzed by intermediate climate targets," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 109(3), pages 807-814, December.
    13. Paul Pecorino & Akram Temimi, 2008. "The Group Size Paradox Revisited," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 10(5), pages 785-799, October.
    14. Aldy,Joseph E. & Stavins,Robert N. (ed.), 2009. "Post-Kyoto International Climate Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521129527.
    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. Ding, Rui & Wang, Xianjia & Liu, Yang & Zhao, Jinhua & Gu, Cuiling, 2023. "Evolutionary games with environmental feedbacks under an external incentive mechanism," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    2. Chica, Manuel & Santos, Francisco C., 2023. "Seeding leading cooperators and institutions in networked climate dilemmas," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    3. Li, Wen-Jing & Chen, Zhi & Jin, Ke-Zhong & Wang, Jun & Yuan, Lin & Gu, Changgui & Jiang, Luo-Luo & Perc, Matjaž, 2022. "Options for mobility and network reciprocity to jointly yield robust cooperation in social dilemmas," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 435(C).
    4. Chica, Manuel & Hernández, Juan M. & Santos, Francisco C., 2022. "Cooperation dynamics under pandemic risks and heterogeneous economic interdependence," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    5. Li, Wen-Jing & Jiang, Luo-Luo & Chen, Zhi & Perc, Matjaž & Slavinec, Mitja, 2020. "Optimization of mobile individuals promotes cooperation in social dilemmas," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    6. Quan, Ji & Yu, Junyu & Li, Xia & Wang, Xianjia, 2023. "Conditional switching between social excluders and loners promotes cooperation in spatial public goods game," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    7. Marco Tomassini & Alberto Antonioni, 2019. "Computational Behavioral Models for Public Goods Games on Social Networks," Games, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-14, September.
    8. Brekke, Kjell Arne & Konow, James & Nyborg, Karine, 2017. "Framing in a threshold public goods experiment with heterogeneous endowments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 99-110.
    9. Yang, Yixin & Pan, Qiuhui & He, Mingfeng, 2023. "The influence of environment-based autonomous mobility on the evolution of cooperation," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    10. Bulutay, Muhammed & Hales, David & Julius, Patrick & Tasch, Weiwei, 2021. "Imperfect tacit collusion and asymmetric price transmission," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 192(C), pages 584-599.
    11. Kreitmair, Ursula & Bower-Bir, Jacob, 2021. "Too different to solve climate change? Experimental evidence on the effects of production and benefit heterogeneity on collective action," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    12. Kenan Kalaycı, 2016. "Confusopoly: competition and obfuscation in markets," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 19(2), pages 299-316, June.
    13. Colasante, Annarita, 2017. "Selection of the distributional rule as an alternative tool to foster cooperation in a Public Good Game," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 468(C), pages 482-492.
    14. Yu, Fengyuan & Wang, Jianwei & He, Jialu, 2022. "Inequal dependence on members stabilizes cooperation in spatial public goods game," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 165(P1).
    15. Daniele Nosenzo & Simone Quercia & Martin Sefton, 2015. "Cooperation in small groups: the effect of group size," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(1), pages 4-14, March.
    16. Cheng, Fei & Chen, Tong & Chen, Qiao, 2020. "Rewards based on public loyalty program promote cooperation in public goods game," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 378(C).
    17. Waichman, Israel & Requate, Till & Karde, Markus & Milinski, Manfred, 2021. "Challenging conventional wisdom: Experimental evidence on heterogeneity and coordination in avoiding a collective catastrophic event," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    18. Lee, Hsuan-Wei & Cleveland, Colin & Szolnoki, Attila, 2021. "Small fraction of selective cooperators can elevate general wellbeing significantly," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 582(C).
    19. Chang, Shuhua & Zhang, Zhipeng & Wu, Yu’e & Xie, Yunya, 2018. "Cooperation is enhanced by inhomogeneous inertia in spatial prisoner’s dilemma game," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 490(C), pages 419-425.
    20. Zhenghong Wu & Huan Huang & Qinghu Liao, 2021. "The study on the role of dedicators on promoting cooperation in public goods game," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(9), pages 1-17, September.

    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:eee:apmaco:v:410:y:2021:i:c:s0096300321005348. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/applied-mathematics-and-computation .

    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.