A choice for 'me' or for 'us'? Using we-reasoning to predict cooperation and coordination in games

Theory and Decision 73 (1):53-76 (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Cooperation is the foundation of human social life, but it sometimes requires individuals to choose against their individual self-interest. How then is cooperation sustained? How do we decide when instead to follow our own goals? I develop a model that builds on Bacharach (in: Gold, Sugden (eds) Beyond individual choice: teams and frames in game theory, 2006) ‘circumspect we-reasoning’ to address these questions. The model produces a threshold cost/benefit ratio to describe when we-reasoning players should choose cooperatively. After assumptions regarding player types and beliefs, we predict how the extent of cooperation varies across games. Results from two experiments offer strong support to the models and predictions herein

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,423

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Coordination and cooperation.Maarten C. W. Janssen - 2003 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (2):165-166.
A critique of team and stackelberg reasoning.Herbert Gintis - 2003 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (2):160-161.
Beyond rationality: Rigor without mortis in game theory.Andrew M. Colman - 2003 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (2):180-192.
What niche did human cooperativeness evolve in?Hannes Rusch - 2013 - Ethics and Politics 15 (2):82-100.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-12-01

Downloads
278 (#70,313)

6 months
18 (#135,981)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?