• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

人类在社会困境中的合作模型。

A model of human cooperation in social dilemmas.

机构信息

Department of Mathematics, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2013 Aug 29;8(8):e72427. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0072427. eCollection 2013.

DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0072427
PMID:24009679
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3756993/
Abstract

Social dilemmas are situations in which collective interests are at odds with private interests: pollution, depletion of natural resources, and intergroup conflicts, are at their core social dilemmas. Because of their multidisciplinarity and their importance, social dilemmas have been studied by economists, biologists, psychologists, sociologists, and political scientists. These studies typically explain tendency to cooperation by dividing people in proself and prosocial types, or appealing to forms of external control or, in iterated social dilemmas, to long-term strategies. But recent experiments have shown that cooperation is possible even in one-shot social dilemmas without forms of external control and the rate of cooperation typically depends on the payoffs. This makes impossible a predictive division between proself and prosocial people and proves that people have attitude to cooperation by nature. The key innovation of this article is in fact to postulate that humans have attitude to cooperation by nature and consequently they do not act a priori as single agents, as assumed by standard economic models, but they forecast how a social dilemma would evolve if they formed coalitions and then they act according to their most optimistic forecast. Formalizing this idea we propose the first predictive model of human cooperation able to organize a number of different experimental findings that are not explained by the standard model. We show also that the model makes satisfactorily accurate quantitative predictions of population average behavior in one-shot social dilemmas.

摘要

社会困境是指集体利益与个人利益相冲突的情况

污染、自然资源枯竭以及群体间冲突,这些都是社会困境的核心问题。由于其跨学科性和重要性,经济学家、生物学家、心理学家、社会学家和政治学家都对社会困境进行了研究。这些研究通常通过将人分为自利型和利他型,或者诉诸外部控制的形式,或者在重复的社会困境中诉诸长期策略,来解释合作的倾向。但是最近的实验表明,即使在没有外部控制形式的单次社会困境中,合作也是可能的,合作的比率通常取决于收益。这使得不可能对自利型和利他型人群进行预测性的划分,并证明人们天生就有一种合作的态度。本文的一个关键创新是假设人类天生就有合作的态度,因此他们不会像标准经济模型所假设的那样,先验地作为单一主体行事,而是会预测如果他们形成联盟,社会困境将如何演变,然后根据他们最乐观的预测行事。通过形式化这个想法,我们提出了第一个能够组织许多不能用标准模型解释的人类合作的预测模型。我们还表明,该模型能够令人满意地准确预测单次社会困境中的群体平均行为。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8e8b/3756993/68f3ff4380fa/pone.0072427.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8e8b/3756993/68f3ff4380fa/pone.0072427.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8e8b/3756993/68f3ff4380fa/pone.0072427.g001.jpg

相似文献

1
A model of human cooperation in social dilemmas.人类在社会困境中的合作模型。
PLoS One. 2013 Aug 29;8(8):e72427. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0072427. eCollection 2013.
2
Group size effect on cooperation in one-shot social dilemmas.单次社会困境中群体规模对合作的影响。
Sci Rep. 2015 Jan 21;5:7937. doi: 10.1038/srep07937.
3
Three is a crowd in iterated prisoner's dilemmas: experimental evidence on reciprocal behavior.在重复囚徒困境中,三个人就太多了:关于互惠行为的实验证据。
Sci Rep. 2012;2:638. doi: 10.1038/srep00638. Epub 2012 Sep 7.
4
Which risk scenarios can drive the emergence of costly cooperation?哪些风险情形会促使代价高昂的合作出现?
Sci Rep. 2016 Jan 20;6:19269. doi: 10.1038/srep19269.
5
Collapse of cooperation in evolving games.进化博弈中合作的瓦解。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014 Dec 9;111(49):17558-63. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1408618111. Epub 2014 Nov 24.
6
Reciprocity: weak or strong? What punishment experiments do (and do not) demonstrate.互惠性:强还是弱?惩罚实验(能和不能)证明什么。
Behav Brain Sci. 2012 Feb;35(1):1-15. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X11000069.
7
Generalized Social Dilemmas: The Evolution of Cooperation in Populations with Variable Group Size.广义社会困境:变群组大小的群体中合作的演化。
Bull Math Biol. 2019 Nov;81(11):4643-4674. doi: 10.1007/s11538-018-00545-1. Epub 2018 Dec 17.
8
When is altruistic punishment useful in social dilemmas?在社会困境中,利他惩罚何时有用?
Biosystems. 2018 Dec;174:60-62. doi: 10.1016/j.biosystems.2018.10.015. Epub 2018 Nov 2.
9
Evolution of cooperation in stochastic games.随机博弈中的合作演变。
Nature. 2018 Jul;559(7713):246-249. doi: 10.1038/s41586-018-0277-x. Epub 2018 Jul 4.
10
Trust, conflict, and cooperation: a meta-analysis.信任、冲突与合作:一项元分析。
Psychol Bull. 2013 Sep;139(5):1090-112. doi: 10.1037/a0030939. Epub 2012 Dec 10.

引用本文的文献

1
An epidemiological extension of the El Farol Bar problem.埃尔法罗酒吧问题的流行病学扩展。
Front Big Data. 2025 Feb 26;8:1519369. doi: 10.3389/fdata.2025.1519369. eCollection 2025.
2
Does similarity trigger cooperation? Dyadic effect of similarity in social value orientation and cognitive resources on cooperation.相似性会引发合作吗?社会价值取向和认知资源的相似性对合作的二元效应。
Curr Psychol. 2022 Jun 6:1-12. doi: 10.1007/s12144-022-03276-8.
3
A dual-process approach to cooperative decision-making under uncertainty.一种在不确定性下进行合作决策的双过程方法。

本文引用的文献

1
Spontaneous giving and calculated greed.自发的给予和算计的贪婪。
Nature. 2012 Sep 20;489(7416):427-30. doi: 10.1038/nature11467.
2
Stochastic evolutionary dynamics resolve the Traveler's Dilemma.随机进化动力学解决了旅行者困境。
J Theor Biol. 2012 Jun 21;303:119-27. doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2012.03.014. Epub 2012 Mar 23.
3
Winners don't punish.胜者不惩罚。
PLoS One. 2022 Mar 22;17(3):e0265759. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0265759. eCollection 2022.
4
Data analysis and modeling pipelines for controlled networked social science experiments.受控网络社会科学实验的数据分析和建模流程。
PLoS One. 2020 Nov 24;15(11):e0242453. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0242453. eCollection 2020.
5
The evolution of trust and trustworthiness.信任与诚信的演变。
J R Soc Interface. 2020 Aug;17(169):20200491. doi: 10.1098/rsif.2020.0491. Epub 2020 Aug 12.
6
Freedom of choice adds value to public goods.选择自由为公共物品增值。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020 Jul 28;117(30):17516-17521. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1921806117. Epub 2020 Jul 13.
7
Altruistic food sharing behavior by human infants after a hunger manipulation.饥饿操纵后人类婴儿的利他性食物分享行为。
Sci Rep. 2020 Feb 4;10(1):1785. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-58645-9.
8
Increasing altruistic and cooperative behaviour with simple moral nudges.通过简单的道德推动增加利他主义和合作行为。
Sci Rep. 2019 Aug 15;9(1):11880. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-48094-4.
9
The evolution of lying in well-mixed populations.均匀混合群体中的说谎行为演变。
J R Soc Interface. 2019 Jul 26;16(156):20190211. doi: 10.1098/rsif.2019.0211. Epub 2019 Jul 31.
10
Group size effects and critical mass in public goods games.群体规模效应对公共物品博弈的影响和关键质量。
Sci Rep. 2019 Apr 2;9(1):5503. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-41988-3.
Nature. 2008 Mar 20;452(7185):348-51. doi: 10.1038/nature06723.
4
Human cooperation in social dilemmas: comparing the Snowdrift game with the Prisoner's Dilemma.社会困境中的人类合作:将雪堆博弈与囚徒困境进行比较。
Proc Biol Sci. 2007 Dec 7;274(1628):2965-70. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2007.0793.
5
Five rules for the evolution of cooperation.合作进化的五条规则。
Science. 2006 Dec 8;314(5805):1560-3. doi: 10.1126/science.1133755.
6
Evolution of indirect reciprocity by image scoring.通过形象评分实现间接互惠的进化。
Nature. 1998 Jun 11;393(6685):573-7. doi: 10.1038/31225.
7
The tragedy of the commons. The population problem has no technical solution; it requires a fundamental extension in morality.公地悲剧。人口问题没有技术上的解决方案;它需要道德观念的根本性扩展。
Science. 1968 Dec 13;162(3859):1243-8.
8
Conflict between individual and common interest in an N-person relationship.在N人关系中个人利益与共同利益之间的冲突。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1972 Feb;21(2):190-7. doi: 10.1037/h0032224.