Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw, 00-241 Warsaw, Poland.
Behav Brain Sci. 2019 Aug 13;42:e128. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X19000864.
De Dreu and Gross (D&G) seem to have disregarded some relevant experimental literature on games of conflict, most notably variations on "matching pennies" games. While in such games, "attacker" and "defender" are typically not explicitly labelled, players' differentiated roles yield naturally to such notions. These studies partly validate some of D&G's findings and interpretations.
德格鲁特和格罗斯(D&G)似乎忽视了一些关于冲突博弈的相关实验文献,尤其是“匹配便士”游戏的变体。虽然在这些游戏中,“攻击者”和“防御者”通常没有明确标记,但玩家的差异化角色自然会产生这些概念。这些研究部分验证了 D&G 的一些发现和解释。