Punishment is slower than cooperation or defection in online network games.

Punishment serves as a balancing force that dissuades people from acting selfishly, which complements cooperation as an essential characteristic for the prosperity of human societies. Past studies using economic games with two options (cooperation and defection) reported that cooperation decisions are generally faster than defection decisions and that time pressure possibly induces human players to be more intuitive and thus cooperative. However, it is unclear where punishment decisions sit on this time spectrum. Therefore, we recruited human players and implemented two series of online network games with cooperation, defection, and punishment options. First, we find that punishment decisions are slower than cooperation or defection decisions across both game series. Second, we find that imposing experimental time pressure on in-game decisions neither reduces nor increases the frequency of punishment decisions, suggesting that time pressure may not directly interact with the mechanisms that drive players to choose to punish.

The relationship of the source of punishment and personality traits with investment and punishment in a public goods game.

In this study, we investigated the motivations behind punishing individuals who exploit common resources, a phenomenon crucial for resource preservation. While some researchers suggest punishment stems from concern for the common good, others propose it is driven by anger toward free riders. To probe these motivations, we developed a modified public goods game in which participants had the option to use their own money or the money from the common pool to punish free riders. The analysis included choice behavior, mouse trajectories, and personality traits like anger, empathy, and altruism. According to our results, investments were highest, and punishment was strongest if participants could punish using credits from the common pool, indicating that this is the preferred option to diminish free riding and maintain cooperation in public goods and common good contexts. Also, punishment was highest if the punisher's own investment was high, and the investment of others was low. Concerning traits, highly altruistic individuals tended to invest more and punish less in general but gave harsher punishments when they did choose to use the common pool punitively. Conversely, trait anger and trait empathy were linked to low investment while trait empathy also tended to be related to lower punishment. Taken together, these findings underscore the role of situational factors and personality traits in fostering cooperative behavior and shaping societal norms around costly punishment.

GPT-3.5 altruistic advice is sensitive to reciprocal concerns but not to strategic risk.

Pre-trained large language models (LLMs) have garnered significant attention for their ability to generate human-like textand responses across various domains. This study delves into examines the social and strategic behavior of the commonly used LLM GPT-3.5 by investigating its suggestions in well-established behavioral economics paradigms. Specifically, we focus on socialpreferences, including altruism, reciprocity, and fairness, in the context of two classic economic games: the Dictator Game(DG) and the Ultimatum Game (UG). Our research aims to answer three overarching questions: (1) To what extent do GPT-3.5suggestions reflect human social preferences? (2) How do socio-demographic features of the advisee and (3) technicalparameters of the model influence the suggestions of GPT-3.5? We present detailed empirical evidence from extensiveexperiments with GPT-3.5, analyzing its responses to various game scenarios while manipulating the demographics of theadvisee and the model temperature. Our findings reveal that, in the DG Dictator Game, model suggestions are more altruistic than in humans.We further show that it also picks up on more subtle aspects of human social preferences: fairness and reciprocity. Thisresearch contributes to the ongoing exploration of AI-driven systems' alignment with human behavior and social norms,providing valuable insights into the behavior of pre-trained LLMs and their implications for human-AI interactions.Additionally, our study offers a methodological benchmark for future research examining human-like characteristics andbehaviors in language models.

Increased sensitivity to social hierarchy during social competition versus cooperation.

Social hierarchy is a typical feature of social organization. The ability to quickly recognize social hierarchy information is crucial for adapting to social contexts. Here, we adopted fast periodic visual stimulation with electroencephalography to assess the neural responses to social hierarchy during social competition and cooperation, respectively. Participants first learned hierarchical faces from a competitive game versus a cooperative game. We then sequentially presented the learned hierarchical faces with a specific frequency in a set of faces. Results showed that participants rated the inferior player as lower in the social hierarchy in the cooperative context compared to the competitive context, indicating that social context affects the judgment of others' rank. Moreover, higher neural responses to high and low-hierarchy faces versus medium-hierarchy faces were observed, suggesting rapid discrimination of social hierarchy from faces. Interestingly, rank-specific neural responses were more pronounced in the competitive context than in the cooperative context, indicating increased sensitivity to social hierarchy during social competition versus social cooperation. This study provides behavioral and neural evidence for rapid, automatic processing of social hierarchy information and for an increased sensitivity to such information in competitive versus cooperative social contexts.

The interplay between the proposer's role model and moral behavior modulates proposal processing in the Ultimatum Game: An ERP study.

Economic decision-making plays a paramount role in both individual and national interests. Individuals have fairness preferences in economic decision-making, but a proposer's moral-related information may affect fairness considerations. In prior ERP studies, researchers have suggested moral identity influences fairness preferences in the Ultimatum Game (UG), but there are discrepancies in the results. Furthermore, whether role models (individuals whom someone else looks to help decide suitable behaviors), who can modulate people's moral standards, can affect fairness concerns in UG is still understudied. To address the questions, we selected the moral-related statements by eliminating those with illegal information and employed the ERP technique to explore whether the interplay of the proposer's role model and moral-related behavior influenced fairness processing in the modified UG and the corresponding neural mechanisms. We mainly found that the aforementioned interaction effect on proposal considerations in UG could be mirrored in both rejection rates and P300 variations. The results demonstrate that the interaction between the proposer's role model and moral behavior can modulate fairness concerns in UG. Our current work provides new avenues for elucidating the time course of the influencing mechanism of fair distributions in complicated social environments.

The role of social motivation in sharing and fairness: insights from Williams syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Sharing and fairness are important prosocial behaviors that help us navigate the social world. However, little is known about how and whether individuals with Williams Syndrome (WS) engage in these behaviors. The unique phenotype of individuals with WS, consisting of high social motivation and limited social cognition, can also offer insight into the role of social motivation in sharing and fairness when compared to typically developing (TD) individuals. The current study used established experimental paradigms to examine sharing and fairness in individuals with WS and TD individuals. METHODS: We compared a sample of patients with WS to TD children (6-year-olds) matched by mental age (MA) on two experimental tasks: the Dictator Game (DG, Experiment 1, N = 17 WS, 20 TD) with adults modeling giving behaviors used to test sharing and the Inequity Game (IG, Experiment 2, N = 14 WS, 17 TD) used to test fairness. RESULTS: Results showed that the WS group behaved similarly to the TD group for baseline giving in the DG and in the IG, rejecting disadvantageous offers but accepting advantageous ones. However, after viewing an adult model giving behavior, the WS group gave more than their baseline, with many individuals giving more than half, while the TD group gave less. Combined these results suggest that social motivation is sufficient for sharing and, in particular, generous sharing, as well as the self-focused form of fairness. Further, individuals with WS appear capable of both learning to be more generous and preventing disadvantageous outcomes, a more complex profile than previously known. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the present study provides a snapshot into sharing and fairness-related behaviors in WS, contributing to our understanding of the intriguing social-behavioral phenotype associated with this developmental disorder.

Children Sustain Cooperation in a Threshold Public-Goods Game Even When Seeing Others' Outcomes.

Many societal challenges are threshold dilemmas requiring people to cooperate to reach a threshold before group benefits can be reaped. Yet receiving feedback about others' outcomes relative to one's own (relative feedback) can undermine cooperation by focusing group members' attention on outperforming each other. We investigated the impact of relative feedback compared to individual feedback (only seeing one's own outcome) on cooperation in children from Germany and India (6- to 10-year-olds, N = 240). Using a threshold public-goods game with real water as a resource, we show that, although feedback had an effect, most groups sustained cooperation at high levels in both feedback conditions until the end of the game. Analyses of children's communication (14,374 codable utterances) revealed more references to social comparisons and more verbal efforts to coordinate in the relative-feedback condition. Thresholds can mitigate the most adverse effects of social comparisons by focusing attention on a common goal.

Trait reward sensitivity modulates connectivity with the temporoparietal junction and Anterior Insula during strategic decision making.

Many decisions happen in social contexts such as negotiations, yet little is understood about how people balance fairness versus selfishness. Past investigations found that activation in brain areas involved in executive function and reward processing was associated with people offering less with no threat of rejection from their partner, compared to offering more when there was a threat of rejection. However, it remains unclear how trait reward sensitivity may modulate activation and connectivity patterns in these situations. To address this gap, we used task-based fMRI to examine the relation between reward sensitivity and the neural correlates of bargaining choices. Participants (N = 54) completed the Sensitivity to Punishment (SP)/Sensitivity to Reward (SR) Questionnaire and the Behavioral Inhibition System/Behavioral Activation System scales. Participants performed the Ultimatum and Dictator Games as proposers and exhibited strategic decisions by being fair when there was a threat of rejection, but being selfish when there was not a threat of rejection. We found that strategic decisions evoked activation in the Inferior Frontal Gyrus (IFG) and the Anterior Insula (AI). Next, we found elevated IFG connectivity with the Temporoparietal junction (TPJ) during strategic decisions. Finally, we explored whether trait reward sensitivity modulated brain responses while making strategic decisions. We found that people who scored lower in reward sensitivity made less strategic choices when they exhibited higher AI-Angular Gyrus connectivity. Taken together, our results demonstrate how trait reward sensitivity modulates neural responses to strategic decisions, potentially underscoring the importance of this factor within social and decision neuroscience.

Collective action within an environment of unknown unknowns: Experiences with the port of Mars Game.

There is limited research about how groups solve collective action problems in uncertain environments, especially if groups are confronted with unknown unknowns. We aim to develop a more comprehensive view of the characteristics that allow both groups and individuals to navigate such issues more effectively. In this article, we present the results of a new online experiment where individuals make decisions of whether to contribute to the group or pursue self-interest in an environment with high uncertainty, including unknown unknowns. The behavioral game, Port of Mars is framed as a first-generation habitat on Mars where participants have to make decisions on how much to invest in the shared infrastructure to maintain system health and how much to invest in personal goals. Participants can chat during the game, and take surveys before and after the game in order to measure personality attributes and observations from the game. Initial results suggest that a higher average social value orientation and more communication are the key factors that explain why some groups are more successful than others in surviving Port of Mars. Neither other attributes of players nor the group's communication content explain the observed differences between groups.

An evaluation of the Ultimatum Game as a measure of irritability and anger.

The Ultimatum Game is an effective tool for understanding how social decision-making is influenced by emotions in both research and clinical settings. Previous findings have shown that the Ultimatum Game can evoke negative emotions, especially anger and aggression. In a sample of non-clinical adults (N = 143) we evaluated the sensitivity of an anger-infused version of the Ultimatum Game to individual differences in anger and irritability. Findings showed significant relationships between anger and aggressive behaviors in the Ultimatum game, but no association between irritability and aggressive behavior were observed. This indicates that the anger-infused Ultimatum Game is a promising method for studying individual differences in trait anger and anger expression. However, the relationship between decision-making in the anger-infused Ultimatum Game and irritability is less straight forward and needs further investigation. Therefore, when studying the behavioral responses of irritability, it would be beneficial to capture other behaviors beyond aggressive responses.

The impact of strategies on young children's saving for the future.

The ability to save resources for future use, or saving, begins to emerge around 3 years of age, but children show low rates of saving during the preschool years. Thus, several strategies have been used to improve preschoolers' saving, such as providing a prompt, budgeting, increasing psychological distance, and simulating the future. The current study investigated (a) the development of saving in early childhood, (b) the impact of several saving strategies on children's saving (i.e., budgeting, tracking expenses, and psychological distance), and (c) whether the effectiveness of the strategies changed with age. Here, 3- to 5-year-old Canadian children (N = 254) completed the Saving Board Game, and their parents completed the saving subscale of the Children's Future Thinking Questionnaire. In the Saving Board Game, children were randomly assigned to one of the five strategies: (a) control, (b) budgeting, (c) tracking, (d) adult perspective, or (e) child perspective. An analysis of covariance with age, strategy, and response option order (as a covariate) showed a main effect of age, with 5-year-olds saving more than 3-year-olds. There was no effect of strategy or an interaction between strategy and age on children's token saving. Parent-reported child saving was positively correlated with children's Saving Board Game performance only in the control condition. We consider why these strategies failed to increase children's saving.

Age, but not education, affects social decision-making in the ultimatum game paradigm.

BACKGROUND: Social decision-making (SDM) is often studied through gaming paradigms, in which participants allocate resources among themselves and others based on predefined rules. In an adapted version of the ultimatum game (UG), SDM behavior was modulated in response to the degree of fairness of monetary offers and the social context of opponents, designed to generate either prosocial or punishing behaviors. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether SDM evaluated by the UG is affected by age and schooling, as it is relevant to know whether sociodemographic variables may bias UG results. METHODS: A total of 131 healthy adults participated: 35 young university students and 96 participants in Universidade de São Paulo's USP 60+ program (formerly known as Universidade Aberta à Terceira Idade, a program for people aged ≥ 60 years to attend university). The sample was divided into 3 age groups (17-22, 60-69, and 70-79 years) and 3 schooling groups (4-8, 9-11, and ≥ 12 years of schooling). RESULTS: Age and schooling did not affect performance in fair monetary offers. Differences were observed in the unfair conditions. The oldest group (70-79 years) accepted less frequently the baseline unfair offers (without social context), when compared with the 17-22 and the 60-69 years groups (17-22 = 60-69 > 70-79). Regarding the prosocial unfair and punishing unfair conditions, older adults accepted such offers more frequently (17-22 < 60-69 = 70-79). Schooling effects were not observed. CONCLUSION: In the context of SDM, older adults may show prosocial behaviors more frequently than younger adults. The findings suggest performance in the UG is affected by age, but not by schooling.

ANTECEDENTES: A tomada de decisão social (TDS) é frequentemente estudada por meio de paradigmas de jogo, em que os participantes alocam recursos entre si e outros com base em regras predefinidas. Em uma versão adaptada do jogo do ultimato (JU), o comportamento de TDS foi modulado em resposta ao grau de justiça das ofertas monetárias e ao contexto social dos oponentes, projetado para produzir comportamentos pró-sociais ou punitivos. OBJETIVO: Investigar se a TDS avaliada pelo JU é afetada pela idade e escolaridade, pois é relevante saber se variáveis sociodemográficas podem influenciar os resultados do JU. MéTODOS: Participaram 131 adultos saudáveis, sendo 35 jovens universitários e 96 participantes do programa USP 60+ (antigo Universidade Aberta à Terceira Idade). A amostra foi dividida em 3 faixas etárias (17­22, 60­69 e 70­79 anos) e 3 faixas de escolaridade (4­8, 9­11 e ≥ 12 anos). RESULTADOS: Idade e escolaridade não afetaram o desempenho em ofertas monetárias justas. Diferenças foram observadas nas condições injustas. O grupo mais velho (70­79 anos) aceitou menos as ofertas injustas de referência (sem contexto social), quando comparado com o grupo de 17­22 e o de 60­69 anos (17­22 = 60­69 > 70­79). Em relação às condições pró-sociais injustas e punitivas injustas, os idosos aceitaram com maior frequência tais ofertas (17­22 < 60­69 = 70­79). Efeitos da escolaridade não foram observados. CONCLUSãO: No contexto da TDS, os idosos podem apresentar comportamentos pró-sociais com mais frequência do que os adultos mais jovens. Os resultados sugerem que o desempenho no JU é afetado pela idade, mas não pela escolaridade.

Influence of male's facial attractiveness, vocal attractiveness and social interest on female's decisions of fairness.

The present study employed dictator game and ultimatum game to investigate the effect of facial attractiveness, vocal attractiveness and social interest in expressing positive ("I like you") versus negative signals ("I don't like you") on decision making. Female participants played against male recipients in dictator game and ultimatum game while played against male proposers in ultimatum game. Results showed that participants offered recipients with attractive faces more money than recipients with unattractive faces. Participants also offered recipients with attractive voices more money than recipients with unattractive voices, especially under the positive social interest condition. Moreover, participants allocated more money to recipients who expressed positive social interest than those who expressed negative social interest, whereas they would also expect proposers who expressed positive social interest to offer them more money than proposers who expressed negative social interest. Overall, the results inform beauty premium for faces and voices on opposite-sex economic bargaining. Social interest also affects decision outcomes. However, the beauty premium and effect of social interest varies with participants' roles.

Influence of protective clothing and masks on facial trustworthiness in an investment game: insights from a Chinese population study.

Facial features are important sources of information about perceived trustworthiness. Masks and protective clothing diminish the visibility of facial cues by either partially concealing the mouth and nose or covering the entire face. During the pandemic, the use of personal protective equipment affected and redefined who trusts whom in society. This study used the classical investment game of interpersonal trust with Chinese participants to explore the impact of occlusion on interpersonal trust. Faces with moderate initial trustworthiness were occluded by a mask or protective clothing in Experiment 1 and were digitally occluded by a square in Experiment 2, and faces with three levels of initial trustworthiness were occluded by a mask in Experiment 3. Results showed that both undergraduates (Experiment 1a) and non-student adults (Experiment 1b) perceived the faces with protective clothing as more trustworthy than faces wearing standard masks and faces not wearing masks. Faces with the top halves showing were perceived as trustworthy as full faces, while faces with the bottom halves showing were perceived as less trustworthy. The effect of masks is weak and complex. Masks reduced participants' trust in faces with high initial trustworthiness, had no effect on faces with low and moderate initial trustworthiness, and only slightly increased the trust of undergraduates in faces with moderate initial trustworthiness. Our findings indicate that the lack of information caused by occlusion and the social significance associated with occlusion collectively affect people's trust behavior in Chinese society. We believe the findings of this study will be useful in elucidating the effects of personal protective equipment usage on perceptions of trustworthiness.

Effects of gamification in advanced life support training for clinical nurses: A cluster randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation training is a mandatory competency, especially for healthcare professionals. However, the spread of COVID-19 caused a sharp decline in the number of participants on advanced life support training, thereby accelerating the diversification of educational methods. Gamification is an increasingly popular method of diversifying instruction, but its effectiveness remains controversial. AIM: To evaluate the effectiveness of gamification learning in advanced life support training. DESIGN: A cluster randomized controlled trial. SETTING: A single advanced life support training center. PARTICIPANTS: Clinical nurses who are currently practicing in a hospital. METHODS: A part of the existing advanced life support course was gamified using Kahoot! platform. Conventional learning and gamified learning were each conducted 11 times, and the level of knowledge after training was assessed. The assessment questions were categorized into advanced life support algorithms, teamwork, and cardiac arrest rhythms. RESULTS: A total of 267 were enrolled in the study, and 148 and 139 learners were assigned to CL and GL, respectively. There was no difference in post-training knowledge related to teamwork, and cardiac arrest rhythms between the conventional learning and gamified learning groups, but knowledge related to the advanced life support algorithm was low in the gamified learning group. CONCLUSIONS: Even if the learners are the same, advanced life support gamification training can lead to negative outcomes depending on the simplicity or goal of the training content. To improve the effectiveness of the training, various methods of gamification training should be applied depending on the goal and content of the training.

Using games to understand the mind.

Board, card or video games have been played by virtually every individual in the world. Games are popular because they are intuitive and fun. These distinctive qualities of games also make them ideal for studying the mind. By being intuitive, games provide a unique vantage point for understanding the inductive biases that support behaviour in more complex, ecological settings than traditional laboratory experiments. By being fun, games allow researchers to study new questions in cognition such as the meaning of 'play' and intrinsic motivation, while also supporting more extensive and diverse data collection by attracting many more participants. We describe the advantages and drawbacks of using games relative to standard laboratory-based experiments and lay out a set of recommendations on how to gain the most from using games to study cognition. We hope this Perspective will lead to a wider use of games as experimental paradigms, elevating the ecological validity, scale and robustness of research on the mind.

Proposer's moral identity modulates fairness processing in the ultimatum game: Evidence from behavior and brain potentials.

Economic decision-making is pivotal to both human private interests and the national economy. People pursue fairness in economic decision-making, but a proposer's moral identity can influence fairness processing. Previous ERP studies have revealed that moral identity has an effect on fairness considerations in the Ultimatum Game (UG), but the findings are inconsistent. To address the issue, we revised the moral-related sentences and used the ERP technique to measure the corresponding neural mechanism. We have observed that the fairness effect in UG can be mirrored in both MFN and P300 changes, whereas the moral identity effect on fairness in UG can be reflected by MFN but not P300 changes. These findings indicate that the moral identity of the proposer can modulate fairness processing in UG. The current study opens new avenues for clarifying the temporal course of the relationship between the proposer's moral identity and fairness in economic decision-making, which is beneficial for understanding the influencing mechanism of fairness processing and fair allocations in complex social contexts.

Perception of experience influences altruism and perception of agency influences trust in human-machine interactions.

As robots become increasingly integrated into social economic interactions, it becomes crucial to understand how people perceive a robot's mind. It has been argued that minds are perceived along two dimensions: experience, i.e., the ability to feel, and agency, i.e., the ability to act and take responsibility for one's actions. However, the influence of these perceived dimensions on human-machine interactions, particularly those involving altruism and trust, remains unknown. We hypothesize that the perception of experience influences altruism, while the perception of agency influences trust. To test these hypotheses, we pair participants with bot partners in a dictator game (to measure altruism) and a trust game (to measure trust) while varying the bots' perceived experience and agency, either by manipulating the degree to which the bot resembles humans, or by manipulating the description of the bots' ability to feel and exercise self-control. The results demonstrate that the money transferred in the dictator game is influenced by the perceived experience, while the money transferred in the trust game is influenced by the perceived agency, thereby confirming our hypotheses. More broadly, our findings support the specificity of the mind hypothesis: Perceptions of different dimensions of the mind lead to different kinds of social behavior.

Prosocial emotions predict individual differences in economic decision-making during ultimatum game with dynamic reciprocal contexts.

Social decision-making is known to be influenced by predictive emotions or the perceived reciprocity of partners. However, the connection between emotion, decision-making, and contextual reciprocity remains less understood. Moreover, arguments suggest that emotional experiences within a social context can be better conceptualised as prosocial rather than basic emotions, necessitating the inclusion of two social dimensions: focus, the degree of an emotion's relevance to oneself or others, and dominance, the degree to which one feels in control of an emotion. For better representation, these dimensions should be considered alongside the interoceptive dimensions of valence and arousal. In an ultimatum game involving fair, moderate, and unfair offers, this online study measured the emotions of 476 participants using a multidimensional affective rating scale. Using unsupervised classification algorithms, we identified individual differences in decisions and emotional experiences. Certain individuals exhibited consistent levels of acceptance behaviours and emotions, while reciprocal individuals' acceptance behaviours and emotions followed external reward value structures. Furthermore, individuals with distinct emotional responses to partners exhibited unique economic responses to their emotions, with only the reciprocal group exhibiting sensitivity to dominance prediction errors. The study illustrates a context-specific model capable of subtyping populations engaged in social interaction and exhibiting heterogeneous mental states.