An experimental study of coperation in a natural seting

Abstract

During the last several decades research in social behavior has allowed to differentiate at least two different types of interactions: cooperation and competition. Specifically, several attempts have been made to predict and explain cooperative behavior. Typically, it has been studied using artificial situations (e.g. Azrin & Lindsley, 1956; Cohen & Lindsley, 1964; Lindsley, 1966; Mithaug & Burgess, 1967, 1968; Schmitt, 1987; Schmitt & Marwell, 1968; Shimoff & Matthews, 1975), being the most typical matrix games like the Prisoner’s Dilemma, but recent studies have incorporated more naturalistic situations. Following the research initiated by Ribes-Iñesta (Ribes-Iñesta, 2001; Ribes- Iñesta & Rangel, 2002) we show how a computerized puzzle-solving task can be used to improve our knowledge of dyadic interactions, as minimal settings representative of social behavior. In three studies, the candidates for a job position could cooperate or not cooperate with another candidate by helping with the other’s puzzles. Results show that the behaviors could be classified in three groups: non-cooperation, graded cooperation, and systematic cooperation. These behavioral tendencies were highly consistent throughout the task and reasonably stable after a one-year interval. Their distribution is not independent of gender; females show a higher frequency of non-cooperative behavior than of systematic cooperation, whereas males show the reverse. These results are in accordance with recent reports in the literature (e.g. Kurzban & Houser, 2001). As previous studies, we demonstrate that the tendency to cooperate is influenced by the cooperative tendency of the others.