首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>other >Chimpanzees Rarely Settle on Consistent Patterns of Play in the Hawk Dove Assurance and Prisoner’s Dilemma Games in a Token Exchange Task
【2h】

Chimpanzees Rarely Settle on Consistent Patterns of Play in the Hawk Dove Assurance and Prisoner’s Dilemma Games in a Token Exchange Task

机译:黑猩猩很少在代币交换任务中解决鹰鸽保证和囚徒困境游戏中一致的游戏模式

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Games derived from experimental economics can be used to directly compare decision-making behavior across primate species, including humans. For example, the use of coordination games, such as the Assurance game, has shown that a variety of primate species can coordinate; however, the mechanism by which they do so appears to differ across species. Recently, these games have been extended to explore anti-coordination and cooperation in monkeys, with evidence that they play the Nash equilibria in sequential games in these other contexts. In the current paper, we use the same methods to explore chimpanzees’ behavior in the Assurance Game; an anti-coordination game, the Hawk Dove game; and a cooperation game with a temptation to defect, the Prisoner’s Dilemma game. We predicted that they would consistently play the Nash equilibria, as do the monkeys, and that, as in previous work, the subjects’ level of experience with cognitive experiments would impact performance. Surprisingly, few of our pairs consistently played the same outcome (i.e., no statistically significant preferences), although those who did showed evidence consistent with Nash equilibria play, the same pattern seen more consistently in the monkeys. We consider reasons for their inconsistent performance; for instance, perhaps it was due to lack of interest in a task that rewarded them almost every trial no matter what option they chose, although this does not explain why they were inconsistent when the monkeys were not. A second goal of our study was to ascertain the effects of exogenous oxytocin in their decision making in one population. In line with recent work showing complex effects of oxytocin on social behavior, we found no effect on subjects’ outcomes. We consider possible explanations for this as well.
机译:来自实验经济学的博弈可用于直接比较包括人类在内的灵长类物种的决策行为。例如,协调游戏(如保证游戏)的使用表明,各种灵长类物种都可以协调。但是,它们这样做的机制似乎因物种而异。最近,这些游戏已扩展到探索猴子的反协调与合作,有证据表明它们在这些其他情况下在连续游戏中扮演纳什均衡。在本文中,我们使用相同的方法来研究黑猩猩在保证游戏中的行为;反协调游戏,鹰鸽游戏;以及一个有缺陷的诱惑的合作游戏,《囚徒困境》游戏。我们预测,它们将像猴子一样持续发挥纳什均衡性,并且与以前的工作一样,受试者的认知实验经验水平也会影响他们的表现。令人惊讶的是,尽管我们的配对中很少有人表现出与纳什均衡游戏一致的证据,但在猴子中却始终如一。我们考虑了其性能不一致的原因;例如,也许是由于对一项任务的兴趣不足,几乎不管他们选择哪种选择都会给他们奖励,尽管这并不能解释为什么猴子没有时他们会不一致。我们研究的第二个目标是确定外源性催产素在一个人群中做出决策的影响。与最近的研究表明催产素对社会行为的复杂影响相一致,我们发现对受试者的结果没有影响。我们也考虑对此的可能解释。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号