Positive Interactions Promote Public Cooperation

The public goods game is the classic laboratory paradigm for studying collective action problems. Each participant chooses how much to contribute to a common pool that returns benefits to all participants equally. The ideal outcome occurs if everybody contributes the maximum amount, but the self-interested strategy is not to contribute anything. Most previous studies have found punishment to be more effective than reward for maintaining cooperation in public goods games. The typical design of these studies, however, represses future consequences for today’s actions. In an experimental setting, we compare public goods games followed by punishment, reward, or both in the setting of truly repeated games, in which player identities persist from round to round. We show that reward is as effective as punishment for maintaining public cooperation and leads to higher total earnings. Moreover, when both options are available, reward leads to increased contributions and payoff, whereas punishment has no effect on contributions and leads to lower payoff. We conclude that reward outperforms punishment in repeated public goods games and that human cooperation in such repeated settings is best supported by positive interactions with others.EconomicsMathematicsOrganismic and Evolutionary Biolog

Assortative human pair-bonding for partner ancestry and allelic variation of the dopamine receptor D4 (DRD4) gene

The 7R allele of the dopamine receptor D4 gene has been associated with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder and risk taking. On the cross-population scale, 7R allele frequencies have been shown to be higher in populations with more of a history of long-term migrations. It has also been shown that the 7R allele is associated with individuals having multiple-ancestries. Here we conduct a replication of this latter finding with two independent samples. Measures of subjects’ ancestry are used to examine past reproductive bonds. The individuals’ history of inter-racial/ancestral dating and their feelings about this are also assessed. Tentative support for an association between multiple ancestries and the 7R allele were found. These results are dependent upon the method of questioning subjects about their ancestries. Inter-racial dating and feelings about inter-racial pairing were not related to the presence of the 7R allele. This might be accounted for by secular trends that might have substantively altered the decision-making process employed when considering relationships with individuals from different groups. This study provides continued support for the 7R allele playing a role in migration and/or mate choice patterns. However, replications and extensions of this study are needed and must carefully consider how ancestry/race is assessed

Androgen Exposure and Sensation-Seeking in Young Males

Testosterone is thought to be associated with short attention spans, increased novelty, and thrill seeking and behavioral disinhibition in men. However, there is little empirical evidence for such associations among normal males. Here we test three separate measures of androgenicity; salivary testosterone (current exposure), facial masculinity (pubertal exposure), and 2D:4D digit ratio (prenatal exposure) as predictors of sensation-seeking in young men. Participants were 98 young men between the ages of 18 and 23. An unstimulated saliva sample was collected for determination of testosterone and participants completed a questionnaire, including Zuckerman’s sensation-seeking scale. Facial photos were obtained and rated for masculinity by anonymous observers. Both right and left hands were scanned to determine 2D:4D digit ratios. In univariate analyses, salivary testosterone (n = 91; r = 0.22; P = 0.04) and facial masculinity (n = 91; r = 0.23; P = 0.04) were significant predictor of boredom susceptibility, but not the disinhibition, thrill-seeking, experience seeking subscales. 2D:4D was not associated with any of measure of sensation-seeking. In multivariate models, facial masculinity was a significant predictor of boredom susceptibility (n = 82; b = 0.35; P = 0.001), controlled for left 2D:4D and salivary testosterone. These results suggest that among men, current and pubertal testosterone exposure are associated with greater need for immediate stimulation, but not other forms of sensation-seeking. This result is consistent with previous findings of a positive relationship between salivary testosterone and delayed discounting, and may reflect the impact of testosterone on dopaminergic reward mechanisms.AnthropologyHuman Evolutionary Biolog

Replicability, Robustness, and Reproducibility in Psychological Science

Replication—an important, uncommon, and misunderstood practice—is gaining appreciation in psychology. Achieving replicability is important for making research progress. If findings are not replicable, then prediction and theory development are stifled. If findings are replicable, then interrogation of their meaning and validity can advance knowledge. Assessing replicability can be productive for generating and testing hypotheses by actively confronting current understandings to identify weaknesses and spur innovation. For psychology, the 2010s might be characterized as a decade of active confrontation. Systematic and multi-site replication projects assessed current understandings and observed surprising failures to replicate many published findings. Replication efforts highlighted sociocultural challenges such as disincentives to conduct replications and a tendency to frame replication as a personal attack rather than a healthy scientific practice, and they raised awareness that replication contributes to self-correction. Nevertheless, innovation in doing and understanding replication and its cousins, reproducibility and robustness, has positioned psychology to improve research practices and accelerate progress

Accidental Outcomes Guide Punishment in a “Trembling Hand” Game

How do people respond to others' accidental behaviors? Reward and punishment for an accident might depend on the actor's intentions, or instead on the unintended outcomes she brings about. Yet, existing paradigms in experimental economics do not include the possibility of accidental monetary allocations. We explore the balance of outcomes and intentions in a two-player economic game where monetary allocations are made with a “trembling hand”: that is, intentions and outcomes are sometimes mismatched. Player 1 allocates $10 between herself and Player 2 by rolling one of three dice. One die has a high probability of a selfish outcome, another has a high probability of a fair outcome, and the third has a high probability of a generous outcome. Based on Player 1's choice of die, Player 2 can infer her intentions. However, any of the three die can yield any of the three possible outcomes. Player 2 is given the opportunity to respond to Player 1's allocation by adding to or subtracting from Player 1's payoff. We find that Player 2's responses are influenced substantially by the accidental outcome of Player 1's roll of the die. Comparison to control conditions suggests that in contexts where the allocation is at least partially under the control of Player 1, Player 2 will punish Player 1 accountable for unintentional negative outcomes. In addition, Player 2's responses are influenced by Player 1's intention. However, Player 2 tends to modulate his responses substantially more for selfish intentions than for generous intentions. This novel economic game provides new insight into the psychological mechanisms underlying social preferences for fairness and retribution

Decision-Making in Research Tasks with Sequential Testing

Background: In a recent controversial essay, published by JPA Ioannidis in PLoS Medicine, it has been argued that in some research fields, most of the published findings are false. Based on theoretical reasoning it can be shown that small effect sizes, error-prone tests, low priors of the tested hypotheses and biases in the evaluation and publication of research findings increase the fraction of false positives. These findings raise concerns about the reliability of research. However, they are based on a very simple scenario of scientific research, where single tests are used to evaluate independent hypotheses. Methodology/Principal Findings: In this study, we present computer simulations and experimental approaches for analyzing more realistic scenarios. In these scenarios, research tasks are solved sequentially, i.e. subsequent tests can be chosen depending on previous results. We investigate simple sequential testing and scenarios where only a selected subset of results can be published and used for future rounds of test choice. Results from computer simulations indicate that for the tasks analyzed in this study, the fraction of false among the positive findings declines over several rounds of testing if the most informative tests are performed. Our experiments show that human subjects frequently perform the most informative tests, leading to a decline of false positives as expected from the simulations. Conclusions/Significance: For the research tasks studied here, findings tend to become more reliable over time. We also find that the performance in those experimental settings where not all performed tests could be published turned out to be surprisingly inefficient. Our results may help optimize existing procedures used in the practice of scientific research and provide guidance for the development of novel forms of scholarly communication.Engineering and Applied SciencesPsycholog

Evaluating the replicability of social science experiments in Nature and Science between 2010 and 2015

Being able to replicate scientific findings is crucial for scientific progress. We replicate 21 systematically selected experimental studies in the social sciences published in Nature and Science between 2010 and 2015. The replications follow analysis plans reviewed by the original authors and pre-registered prior to the replications. The replications are high powered, with sample sizes on average about five times higher than in the original studies. We find a significant effect in the same direction as the original study for 13 (62%) studies, and the effect size of the replications is on average about 50% of the original effect size. Replicability varies between 12 (57%) and 14 (67%) studies for complementary replicability indicators. Consistent with these results, the estimated true-positive rate is 67% in a Bayesian analysis. The relative effect size of true positives is estimated to be 71%, suggesting that both false positives and inflated effect sizes of true positives contribute to imperfect reproducibility. Furthermore, we find that peer beliefs of replicability are strongly related to replicability, suggesting that the research community could predict which results would replicate and that failures to replicate were not the result of chance alone