IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wvu/wpaper/16-16.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Theory of Mind Predicts Cooperative Behavior

Author

Listed:
  • Gregory DeAngelo

    (West Virginia University, Department of Economics)

  • Bryan McCannon

    (West Virginia University, Department of Economics)

Abstract

Explanations for cooperation in Prisoner’s Dilemma games (PD) have generated significant interest. While institutional explanations, such as the role of repeated interactions and communication, have offered considerable explanatory ability, a psychological measure of Theory of the Mind (ToM) – Reading the Mind in the Eyes – of an individual’s ability to process social and emotional cognition offers new insights. Using this measure, we examine how ToM explains (un)cooperative behavior in a standard PD game. We find that subjects who have higher ToM are less cooperative in PD games and extract higher payoffs.

Suggested Citation

  • Gregory DeAngelo & Bryan McCannon, 2016. "Theory of Mind Predicts Cooperative Behavior," Working Papers 16-16, Department of Economics, West Virginia University.
    • Handle: RePEc:wvu:wpaper:16-16
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://busecon.wvu.edu/phd_economics/pdf/16-16.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kreps, David M. & Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John & Wilson, Robert, 1982. "Rational cooperation in the finitely repeated prisoners' dilemma," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 245-252, August.
    2. Serrano, Roberto & Zapater, Inigo, 1998. "The Three-Legged Race: Cooperating to Compete," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 343-363, February.
    3. Nagore Iriberri & Pedro Rey‐Biel, 2013. "Elicited beliefs and social information in modified dictator games: What do dictators believe other dictators do?," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 4(3), pages 515-547, November.
    4. Topi Miettinen & Sigrid Suetens, 2008. "Communication and Guilt in a Prisoner's Dilemma," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 52(6), pages 945-960, December.
    5. Axelrod, Robert, 1981. "The Emergence of Cooperation among Egoists," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 75(2), pages 306-318, June.
    6. Kagel, John & McGee, Peter, 2014. "Personality and cooperation in finitely repeated prisoner’s dilemma games," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 124(2), pages 274-277.
    7. Dreber, Anna & Fudenberg, Drew & Rand, David G., 2014. "Who cooperates in repeated games: The role of altruism, inequity aversion, and demographics," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 41-55.
    8. Pedro Dal Bó & Guillaume R. Fréchette, 2019. "Strategy Choice in the Infinitely Repeated Prisoner's Dilemma," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(11), pages 3929-3952, November.
    9. Sally, David & Hill, Elisabeth, 2006. "The development of interpersonal strategy: Autism, theory-of-mind, cooperation and fairness," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 73-97, February.
    10. Boone, Christophe & De Brabander, Bert & van Witteloostuijn, Arjen, 1999. "The impact of personality on behavior in five Prisoner's Dilemma games," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 343-377, June.
    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. Vassallo, Jarrod P. & Banerjee, Sourindra & Zaman, Hasanuzzaman & Prabhu, Jaideep C., 2023. "Design thinking and public sector innovation: The divergent effects of risk-taking, cognitive empathy and emotional empathy on individual performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    2. Zhang, Hong, 2023. "Evolution of cooperation with tag-based expulsion in spatial public goods game," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).

    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. Appelbaum, Elie & Katz, Eliakim, 2022. "Bonding by guilt: A resolution of the finite horizon prisoners’ dilemma," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    2. Christoph Engel & Lilia Zhurakhovska, 2016. "When is the risk of cooperation worth taking? The prisoner’s dilemma as a game of multiple motives," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(16), pages 1157-1161, November.
    3. 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.
    4. Wu, Steven Y. & Roe, Brian E., 2007. "Discretionary Latitude and Relational Contracting," IZA Discussion Papers 2879, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    5. Vogt, Carsten, 2000. "The evolution of cooperation in Prisoners' Dilemma with an endogenous learning mutant," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 347-373, July.
    6. W. Bentley MacLeod & James M. Malcomson, 2023. "Implicit Contracts, Incentive Compatibility, and Involuntary Unemployment: Thirty Years On," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 179(3-4), pages 470-499.
    7. Kagel, John & McGee, Peter, 2014. "Personality and cooperation in finitely repeated prisoner’s dilemma games," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 124(2), pages 274-277.
    8. MacDonald, James M. & Wu, Steven Y., 2009. "Market Competition, Institutions, and Contracting Outcomes: Preliminary Model and Experimental Results," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 50625, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    9. Heller, Yuval & Tubul, Itay, 2023. "Strategies in the repeated prisoner’s dilemma: A cluster analysis," MPRA Paper 117444, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Polonio, Luca & Coricelli, Giorgio, 2019. "Testing the level of consistency between choices and beliefs in games using eye-tracking," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 566-586.
    11. Grandjean, Gilles & Lefebvre, Mathieu & Mantovani, Marco, 2022. "Preferences and strategic behavior in public goods games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 171-185.
    12. Al-Ubaydli, Omar & Jones, Garett & Weel, Jaap, 2016. "Average player traits as predictors of cooperation in a repeated prisoner's dilemma," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 50-60.
    13. Remi Maier-Rigaud, 2008. "International Organizations as Corporate Actors: Agency and Emergence in Theories of International Relations," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2008_07, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    14. Norman Schofield, 2015. "Climate Change, Collapse and Social Choice Theory," Czech Economic Review, Charles University Prague, Faculty of Social Sciences, Institute of Economic Studies, vol. 9(1), pages 007-035, October.
    15. Jean-Pierre Dupuy, 1989. "Convention et Common knowledge," Revue Économique, Programme National Persée, vol. 40(2), pages 361-400.
    16. Takafumi Yamakawa & Yoshitaka Okano & Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2016. "Detecting motives for cooperation in public goods experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 19(2), pages 500-512, June.
    17. Victor Vikram Odouard & Michael Holton Price, 2022. "Tit for Tattling: Cooperation, communication, and how each could stabilize the other," Papers 2201.06792, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2023.
    18. Matthias Fahn & Anne Schade & Katharina Schüßler, 2017. "What Drives Reciprocal Behavior? The Optimal Provision of Incentives over the Course of Careers," CESifo Working Paper Series 6635, CESifo.
    19. Nick Vikander, 2009. "The Breakdown of Morale," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 09-027/1, Tinbergen Institute.
    20. Maliheh Taheri & Pia Rotshtein & Ulrik Beierholm, 2018. "The effect of attachment and environmental manipulations on cooperative behavior in the prisoner’s dilemma game," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(11), pages 1-17, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Cooperation; Experiment; Prisoner’s Dilemma; Reading Mind in the Eyes; Theory of the Mind;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:wvu:wpaper:16-16. 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: Feng Yao (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dewvuus.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.