加载中

    Costly punishment prevails in intergroup conflict. Sääksvuori Lauri,Mappes Tapio,Puurtinen Mikael Proceedings. Biological sciences Understanding how societies resolve conflicts between individual and common interests remains one of the most fundamental issues across disciplines. The observation that humans readily incur costs to sanction uncooperative individuals without tangible individual benefits has attracted considerable attention as a proximate cause as to why cooperative behaviours might evolve. However, the proliferation of individually costly punishment has been difficult to explain. Several studies over the last decade employing experimental designs with isolated groups have found clear evidence that the costs of punishment often nullify the benefits of increased cooperation, rendering the strong human tendency to punish a thorny evolutionary puzzle. Here, we show that group competition enhances the effectiveness of punishment so that when groups are in direct competition, individuals belonging to a group with punishment opportunity prevail over individuals in a group without this opportunity. In addition to competitive superiority in between-group competition, punishment reduces within-group variation in success, creating circumstances that are highly favourable for the evolution of accompanying group-functional behaviours. We find that the individual willingness to engage in costly punishment increases with tightening competitive pressure between groups. Our results suggest the importance of intergroup conflict behind the emergence of costly punishment and human cooperation. 10.1098/rspb.2011.0252
    Hidden profiles and concealed information: strategic information sharing and use in group decision making. Toma Claudia,Butera Fabrizio Personality & social psychology bulletin Two experiments investigated the differential impact of cooperation and competition on strategic information sharing and use in a three-person group decision-making task. Information was distributed in order to create a hidden profile so that disconfirmation of group members' initial preferences was required to solve the task. Experiment 1 revealed that competition, compared to cooperation, led group members to withhold unshared information, a difference that was not significant for shared information. In competition, compared to cooperation, group members were also more reluctant to disconfirm their initial preferences. Decision quality was lower in competition than in cooperation, this effect being mediated by disconfirmation use and not by information sharing. Experiment 2 replicated these findings and revealed the role of mistrust in predicting strategic information sharing and use in competition. These results support a motivated information processing approach of group decision making. 10.1177/0146167209333176
    Organizational learning, diffusion of innovation, and international collaboration in telemedicine. Robinson David F,Savage Grant T,Campbell Kim Sydow Health care management review The authors analyze competing forces affecting the diffusion of telemedicine practices across organizations, potential learning effects from telemedicine practice, and their implications for the development of telemedicine-based networks. They also speculate on the learning, diffusion, and institutional effects that telemedical collaboration may trigger; five sets of propositions are advanced to explain these effects. 10.1097/00004010-200301000-00008
    Collective action and the collaborative brain. Gavrilets Sergey Journal of the Royal Society, Interface Humans are unique both in their cognitive abilities and in the extent of cooperation in large groups of unrelated individuals. How our species evolved high intelligence in spite of various costs of having a large brain is perplexing. Equally puzzling is how our ancestors managed to overcome the collective action problem and evolve strong innate preferences for cooperative behaviour. Here, I theoretically study the evolution of social-cognitive competencies as driven by selection emerging from the need to produce public goods in games against nature or in direct competition with other groups. I use collaborative ability in collective actions as a proxy for social-cognitive competencies. My results suggest that collaborative ability is more likely to evolve first by between-group conflicts and then later be utilized and improved in games against nature. If collaborative abilities remain low, the species is predicted to become genetically dimorphic with a small proportion of individuals contributing to public goods and the rest free-riding. Evolution of collaborative ability creates conditions for the subsequent evolution of collaborative communication and cultural learning. 10.1098/rsif.2014.1067
    The cooperation link: Power and context moderate verbal mimicry. Richardson Beth H,McCulloch Kathleen C,Taylor Paul J,Wall Helen J Journal of experimental psychology. Applied Drawing on theories of mimicry as a schema-driven process, we tested whether the degree of verbal mimicry is dependent on the congruence between interactants' power dynamic (symmetric versus asymmetric), task type (cooperative versus competitive), and interaction context (negotiation versus social). Experiment 1 found higher verbal mimicry among dyads who successfully completed a cooperative problem-solving task compared with those who did not, but only under conditions of symmetric, not asymmetric, power. Experiment 2 had dyads complete either a cooperative or a competitive negotiation task, under conditions of symmetric versus asymmetric power. Verbal mimicry was associated with improved negotiation outcomes under conditions of cooperation and symmetry, and competition and asymmetry. Experiment 3 completes this picture by separating cooperative-competitive orientation from the interaction context. Consistent with Experiment 2, verbal mimicry was associated with task success during a negotiation context with asymmetric power, and during a social interaction context with symmetric power. Our results point to the contextual link between verbal mimicry and task outcome. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved). 10.1037/xap0000200
    Group Cooperation, Carrying-Capacity Stress, and Intergroup Conflict. De Dreu Carsten K W,Gross Jörg,Fariña Andrea,Ma Yina Trends in cognitive sciences Peaceful intergroup relations deteriorate when individuals engage in parochial cooperation and parochial competition. To understand when and why intergroup relations change from peaceful to violent, we present a theoretical framework mapping out the different interdependence structures between groups. According to this framework, cooperation can lead to group expansion and ultimately to carrying-capacity stress. In such cases of endogenously created carrying-capacity stress, intergroup relations are more likely to become negatively interdependent, and parochial competition can emerge as a response. We discuss the cognitive, neural, and hormonal building blocks of parochial cooperation, and conclude that conflict between groups can be the inadvertent consequence of human preparedness - biological and cultural - to solve cooperation problems within groups. 10.1016/j.tics.2020.06.005
    Accelerating Innovation Through Coopetition: The Innovation Learning Network Experience. McCarthy Chris,Ford Carleton Penny,Krumpholz Elizabeth,Chow Marilyn P Nursing administration quarterly Coopetition, the simultaneous pursuit of cooperation and competition, is a growing force in the innovation landscape. For some organizations, the primary mode of innovation continues to be deeply secretive and highly competitive, but for others, a new style of shared challenges, shared purpose, and shared development has become a superior, more efficient way of working to accelerate innovation capabilities and capacity. Over the last 2 decades, the literature base devoted to coopetition has gradually expanded. However, the field is still in its infancy. The majority of coopetition research is qualitative, primarily consisting of case studies. Few studies have addressed the nonprofit sector or service industries such as health care. The authors believe that this article may offer a unique perspective on coopetition in the context of a US-based national health care learning alliance designed to accelerate innovation, the Innovation Learning Network or ILN. The mission of the ILN is to "Share the joy and pain of innovation," accelerating innovation by sharing solutions, teaching techniques, and cultivating friendships. These 3 pillars (sharing, teaching, and cultivating) form the foundation for coopetition within the ILN. Through the lens of coopetition, we examine the experience of the ILN over the last 10 years and provide case examples that illustrate the benefits and challenges of coopetition in accelerating innovation in health care. 10.1097/NAQ.0000000000000268
    Effects of competitive learning tools on medical students: A case study. Corell Alfredo,Regueras Luisa M,Verdú Elena,Verdú María J,de Castro Juan P PloS one OBJECTIVE:Competitive learning techniques are being successfully used in courses of different disciplines. However, there is still a significant gap in analyzing their effects in medical students competing individually. The authors conducted this study to assess the effectiveness of the use of a competitive learning tool on the academic achievement and satisfaction of medical students. METHODS:The authors collected data from a Human Immunology course in medical students (n = 285) and conducted a nonrandomized (quasi-experimental) control group pretest-posttest design. They used the Mann-Whitney U-test to measure the strength of the association between two variables and to compare the two student groups. RESULTS:The improvement and academic outcomes of the experimental group students were significantly higher than those of the control group students. The students using the competitive learning tool had better academic performance, and they were satisfied with this type of learning. The study, however, had some limitations. The authors did not make a random assignment to the control and experimental groups and the groups were not completely homogenous. CONCLUSION:The use of competitive learning techniques motivates medical students, improves their academic outcomes and may foster the cooperation among students and provide a pleasant classroom environment. The authors are planning further studies with a more complete evaluation of cognitive learning styles or incorporating chronometry as well as team-competition. 10.1371/journal.pone.0194096
    Cooperation Makes a Group be More Creative. Lu Kelong,Xue Hua,Nozawa Takayuki,Hao Ning Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) This study investigated how cooperative and competitive interaction modes affect the group creative performance. The participants were recruited as dyads to solve 2 problems either demanding divergent thinking (alternative uses task, AUT) or not (object characteristic task, OCT). The dyads solved 1 of the 2 problems in the cooperative mode and the other in the competitive mode. Functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS)-based hyperscanning was used to record their neural activities in the prefrontal and right temporal-parietal junction (r-TPJ) regions. Results revealed the dyads showed higher AUT fluency, AUT originality, OCT fluency, and cooperation level in the cooperative mode than in the competitive mode. The fNIRS data revealed increased (task-baseline) interpersonal brain synchronization (IBS) in the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (r-DLPFC) and r-TPJ, only for dyads in the AUT/cooperation condition. In both r-DLPFC and r-TPJ, the IBS of dyads in the AUT/cooperation condition was stronger than in the AUT/competition and OCT/cooperation. Moreover, a stronger IBS was evoked between the regions in prefrontal and posterior temporal regions in the AUT/cooperation condition, as compared with the competition mode. These findings suggest that enhanced IBS may underlie the positive effects of cooperation as compared with the competition in terms of group creativity. 10.1093/cercor/bhy215
    Multiagent cooperation and competition with deep reinforcement learning. Tampuu Ardi,Matiisen Tambet,Kodelja Dorian,Kuzovkin Ilya,Korjus Kristjan,Aru Juhan,Aru Jaan,Vicente Raul PloS one Evolution of cooperation and competition can appear when multiple adaptive agents share a biological, social, or technological niche. In the present work we study how cooperation and competition emerge between autonomous agents that learn by reinforcement while using only their raw visual input as the state representation. In particular, we extend the Deep Q-Learning framework to multiagent environments to investigate the interaction between two learning agents in the well-known video game Pong. By manipulating the classical rewarding scheme of Pong we show how competitive and collaborative behaviors emerge. We also describe the progression from competitive to collaborative behavior when the incentive to cooperate is increased. Finally we show how learning by playing against another adaptive agent, instead of against a hard-wired algorithm, results in more robust strategies. The present work shows that Deep Q-Networks can become a useful tool for studying decentralized learning of multiagent systems coping with high-dimensional environments. 10.1371/journal.pone.0172395
    Between-group competition, intra-group cooperation and relative performance. Cárdenas Juan C,Mantilla César Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience We report the results of a new public goods experiment with an intra-group cooperation dilemma and inter-group competition. In our design subjects receive information about their relative individual and group performance after each round with non-incentivized and then incentivized group competition. We found that, on average, individuals with low relative performance reduce their contributions to the public good, but groups with low performance increase theirs. With incentivized competition, where the relative ranking of the group increases individual payoffs, the reaction to relative performance is larger with individuals contributing more to the group; further, we observe that the variance of strategies decreases as individual and group rankings increase. These results offer new insights on how social comparison shapes similar reactions in games with different incentives for group performance and how competition and cooperation can influence each other. 10.3389/fnbeh.2015.00033
    Cooperation Improves Success during Intergroup Competition: An Analysis Using Data from Professional Soccer Tournaments. David Gwendolyn Kim,Wilson Robbie Stuart PloS one The benefit mutually gained by cooperators is considered the ultimate explanation for why cooperation evolved among non-relatives. During intergroup competition, cooperative behaviours within groups that provide a competitive edge over their opposition should be favoured by selection, particularly in lethal human warfare. Aside from forming larger groups, three other ways that individuals within a group can cooperate to improve their chances of gaining a mutual benefit are: (i) greater networking, (ii) contributing more effort, and (iii) dividing labour. Greater cooperation is expected to increase the chances of gaining a group benefit by improving proficiency in the tasks critical to success-yet empirical tests of this prediction using real-world cases are absent. In this study, we used data derived from 12 international and professional soccer competitions to test the predictions that: 1) greater levels of cooperative behaviour are associated with winning group contests, 2) the three forms of cooperation differ in relative importance for winning matches, 3) competition and tournament-type affect the levels of cooperation and shooting proficiency in matches, and 4) greater levels of networking behaviour are associated with increased proficiency in the most critical task linked with winning success in soccer-shooting at goal. Winners were best predicted by higher shooting proficiency, followed by greater frequencies of networking interactions within a team but unexpectedly, fewer networking partners and less division of labour. Although significant variation was detected across competitions and tournament-types, greater levels of networking behaviour were consistently associated with increased proficiency in shooting at goal, which in turn was linked with winning success. This study empirically supports the idea that intergroup competition can favour cooperation among non-relatives. 10.1371/journal.pone.0136503
    Socially-driven persuasive health intervention design: Competition, social comparison, and cooperation. Orji Rita,Oyibo Kiemute,Lomotey Richard K,Orji Fidelia A Health informatics journal Persuasive technologies are tools for motivating behaviour change using persuasive strategies. socially-driven persuasive technologies employ three common socially-oriented persuasive strategies in many health domains: , and . Research has shown the possibilities for socially-driven persuasive interventions to backfire by demotivating behaviour, but we lack knowledge about how the interventions could motivate or demotivate behaviours. To close this gap, we studied 1898 participants, specifically Socially-oriented strategies and their comparative effectiveness in socially-driven persuasive health interventions that motivate healthy behaviour change. The results of a thematic analysis of 278 pages of qualitative data reveal important strengths and weaknesses of the individual socially-oriented strategies that could facilitate or hinder their effectiveness at motivating behaviour change. These include their tendency to and their tendency , and , and provoke a and , respectively. We contribute to the health informatics community by developing 15 design guidelines for operationalizing the strategies in persuasive health intervention to amplify their strengths and overcome their weaknesses. 10.1177/1460458218766570
    Between-group competition elicits within-group cooperation in children. Majolo Bonaventura,Maréchal Laëtitia Scientific reports Aggressive interactions between groups are frequent in human societies and can bear significant fitness costs and benefits (e.g. death or access to resources). During between-group competitive interactions, more cohesive groups (i.e. groups formed by individuals who cooperate in group defence) should out-perform less cohesive groups, other factors being equal (e.g. group size). The cost/benefit of between-group competition are thought to have driven correlated evolution of traits that favour between-group aggression and within-group cooperation (e.g. parochial altruism). Our aim was to analyse whether the proximate relationship between between-group competition and within-group cooperation is found in 3-10 years old children and the developmental trajectory of such a relationship. We used a large cohort of children (n = 120) and tested whether simulated between-group competition increased within-group cooperation (i.e. how much of a resource children were giving to their group companions) in two experiments. We found greater within-group cooperation when groups of four children were competing with other groups then in the control condition (no between-group competition). Within-group cooperation increased with age. Our study suggests that parochial altruism and in-group/out-group biases emerge early during the course of human development. 10.1038/srep43277
    Are You Keeping an Eye on Me? The Influence of Competition and Cooperation on Joint Simon Task Performance. Mendl Jonathan,Fröber Kerstin,Dolk Thomas Frontiers in psychology Social interaction plays an important role in human life. While there are instances that require cooperation, there are others that force people to compete rather than to cooperate, in order to achieve certain goals. A key question is how the deployment of attention differs between cooperative and competitive situation; however, empirical investigations have yielded inconsistent results. By manipulating the (in-)dependence of individuals via performance-contingent incentives, in a visual go-nogo Simon task the current study aimed at improving our understanding of complementary task performance in a joint action context. In the independent condition each participant received what s/he achieves; in the cooperative condition each participant received the half of what both achieved, and in the competitive condition participants were instructed that the winner takes it all. Extending previous findings, we found sequential processing adjustments of the Simon effect as a function of the interdependency (i.e., competition, cooperation) and transition between (i.e., go-nogo requirements) interacting individuals. While sequential processing adjustments of the Simon effect in both the competition and cooperation condition were unaffected when alternating between responsible actors (i.e., nogo-go transition), sequential processing adjustments were enlarged under competition for repeating responsibilities of one and the same actor (i.e., go-go transitions). In other words, the prospect of performance-contingent reward in a competitive context exclusively impacts flexible behavioral adjustments of one's own actions. Rather than fostering the consideration and differentiation of the other actor, pushing one's own performance to the limit appears to be the suitable strategy in competitive instances of complementary tasks. Therefore, people keep their eyes on themselves when aiming at beating a co-actor and emerging as the winner. 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01361
    Gender differences in the effects of competition and cooperation on risk-taking under ambiguity. Liu Zhenliang,Liu Tiantian,Mu Shoukuan PsyCh journal Decision theories have made a distinction between risk (i.e., known probabilities) and ambiguity (i.e., unknown probabilities). Prior work has examined the effect of competition and cooperation on risk-taking under risk. However, little is known about whether and how competition and cooperation affect risk-taking under ambiguity and the role of gender in this effect. The current study addresses this research gap. In the present study, a shortened version of a balloon analogue risk task was used to assess risk-taking under ambiguity. The participants completed this task in competition against a peer, in cooperation with a peer, or alone. The results showed that the participants took more risks in the competition and cooperation conditions than in the individual condition, but no differences were found between the competition and cooperation conditions. More important, gender modulated these effects. First, these effects were driven by males, but not by females. Second, males showed more risk-taking under ambiguity than females in the competitive situation, but not in the cooperative situation. Overall, this work contributes to understanding the effect of social interaction on risky decisions under ambiguity. 10.1002/pchj.419