ETH Zürich, D-GESS, 8092 Zürich, Switzerland
ETH Zürich, D-GESS, 8092 Zürich, Switzerland.
J R Soc Interface. 2018 Jul;15(144). doi: 10.1098/rsif.2018.0158.
Cooperation among unrelated individuals in social-dilemma-type situations is a key topic in social and biological sciences. It has been shown that, without suitable mechanisms, high levels of cooperation/contributions in repeated public goods games are not stable in the long run. Reputation, as a driver of indirect reciprocity, is often proposed as a mechanism that leads to cooperation. A simple and prominent reputation dynamic function through scoring: contributing behaviour increases one's score, non-contributing reduces it. Indeed, many experiments have established that scoring can sustain cooperation in two-player prisoner's dilemmas and donation games. However, these prior studies focused on pairwise interactions, with no experiment studying reputation mechanisms in more general group interactions. In this paper, we focus on groups and scores, proposing and testing several scoring rules that could apply to multi-player prisoners' dilemmas played in groups, which we test in a laboratory experiment. Results are unambiguously negative: we observe a steady decline of cooperation for every tested scoring mechanism. All scoring systems suffer from it in much the same way. We conclude that the positive results obtained by scoring in pairwise interactions do not apply to multi-player prisoner's dilemmas, and that alternative mechanisms are needed.
在社会困境型情境中,无关个体之间的合作是社会和生物科学的一个关键主题。研究表明,如果没有合适的机制,在重复的公共物品博弈中,高水平的合作/贡献从长远来看是不稳定的。声誉作为间接互惠的驱动因素,常被提议作为一种导致合作的机制。一种简单而突出的声誉动态功能是通过评分实现的:贡献行为会增加一个人的分数,不贡献则会降低分数。事实上,许多实验已经证实,评分可以在两人囚徒困境和捐赠游戏中维持合作。然而,这些先前的研究都集中在两人互动上,没有实验研究更一般的群体互动中的声誉机制。在本文中,我们专注于群体和分数,提出并测试了几种可能适用于群体中多人囚徒困境的评分规则,并在实验室实验中进行了测试。结果是明确的否定:我们观察到,每种测试的评分机制都导致合作率稳步下降。所有评分系统都以同样的方式受到影响。我们得出结论,评分在两人互动中获得的积极结果不适用于多人囚徒困境,需要寻找替代机制。