Targeting Free-Riders as a Mechanism for Sustaining Cooperation
Experimental findings from repeated public good games indicate that high levels of cooperation can be maintained over time. This is achievable when participants are given the ability to identify and penalize 'free-riders'—individuals who contribute less than the established norm.
0
1
Tags
Library Science
Economics
Economy
Introduction to Microeconomics Course
Social Science
Empirical Science
Science
CORE Econ
Ch.4 Strategic interactions and social dilemmas - The Economy 2.0 Microeconomics @ CORE Econ
The Economy 2.0 Microeconomics @ CORE Econ
Related
Influence of Social Norms on Individual Preferences
Ostrom's Game-Theoretic Models with Social Preferences and Punishment
Reputation and Increased Cooperation in Repeated Prisoners' Dilemma Games
Elinor Ostrom
Targeting Free-Riders as a Mechanism for Sustaining Cooperation
Predicting Behavior in a Community Project
In a scenario where two competing local businesses must decide on their advertising spending, a model assuming a single, isolated interaction between purely self-interested parties predicts that both will choose high-spending strategies, resulting in lower profits for both. However, if these businesses are located in a small town and expect to compete for many years, they often end up cooperating by keeping advertising spending low. Which of the following best explains this cooperative outcome, which the simpler model fails to predict?
Explaining Cooperative Behavior Beyond Simple Models
In many large, anonymous online forums, users voluntarily spend time answering complex questions posed by strangers, even with no direct monetary reward. A simple economic model assuming that individuals are purely self-interested and engage in one-time interactions would predict that very few people would answer questions. Which of the following factors, used to enhance such models, provides the least compelling explanation for the widespread cooperative behavior observed in these forums?
Standard economic models often predict non-cooperative outcomes because they assume individuals are purely self-interested and interact only once. However, cooperation is common in the real world. Match each real-world scenario of cooperation with the primary factor that, when added to a model, best explains the observed behavior.
Explaining Cooperation in a Household Dilemma
A game-theoretic model that is expanded to include the possibility of repeated interactions between players will necessarily predict a cooperative outcome.
Explaining Cooperation in an Anonymous Online Project
A simple economic model predicts that two rival software companies, in a one-time interaction, will both engage in costly negative advertising, hurting each other's profits. However, in reality, these companies often refrain from such tactics. An analyst suggests modifying the model by incorporating 'altruism,' assuming each company has some baseline concern for the other's success. Why is this modification, by itself, likely an incomplete explanation for the observed cooperative restraint?
Altruism as a Solution to Social Dilemmas
One-Shot vs. Repeated Games
Designing an Experiment to Test Cooperative Behavior
Learn After
Two groups of people are asked to participate in a multi-round investment game. In each round, every participant is given $10 and can secretly contribute any amount to a group project. The total amount contributed by the group is then doubled and distributed equally among all participants, regardless of their individual contributions.
In Group A, participants can only see the total contribution to the project after each round.
In Group B, participants are shown each individual's contribution after each round and are given the option to spend $1 of their own earnings to reduce another participant's earnings for that round by $3.
Based on experimental findings, which outcome is most likely over the course of many rounds?
Sustaining Community Garden Maintenance
Evaluating Mechanisms for Cooperation
Designing a System for Group Project Success
In a repeated group task where individual contributions are made public but there is no way for participants to directly affect each other's outcomes, cooperation levels are expected to remain high over time simply due to the social pressure of being identified as a low contributor.
A group of individuals participates in a multi-round investment game where they can contribute to a group fund that benefits everyone. After each round, individual contributions are revealed, and participants have the option to pay a small cost to reduce the earnings of another participant. Match each term below to the description that best represents it within the context of this game.
A group of individuals repeatedly plays a game where they can contribute to a collective project that benefits everyone. Initially, there is no mechanism to hold individuals accountable for their contributions. Partway through the game, a new rule is introduced that allows participants to penalize those who contribute little. Arrange the following events in the most likely chronological order.
Improving Team Performance in a Software Company
A shared kitchen in a student dormitory has a persistent problem with residents not cleaning up their own messes. The residents' association wants to implement a new policy to solve this issue. Based on experimental findings about sustaining cooperative behavior, which of the following policies is most likely to result in a lasting improvement in kitchen cleanliness?
Experimental studies of group cooperation find that allowing participants to impose a cost on individuals who contribute little to a collective effort is a key mechanism for preventing the decline of contributions. These low-contributing individuals are commonly referred to as ____.