Abstract:The long tradition of research on cooperation includes a well-established finding that individuals respond to the degree of conflict between self- and collective interests (that is, the relative benefits from cooperation) in providing public goods. Existing empirical evidence builds upon settings where participants make multiple decisions or strategically consider alternative scenarios. Here, we consider a decision setting where participants face a one-time (single-decision) setting. One-time cooperative encounters often occur in volunteering or donating to immediate needs for crisis relief. For these distinct and highly relevant settings, we report a lack of responsiveness to increases in cooperation benefits, thereby highlighting limits to our understanding of the determinants of one-time cooperation encounters. Across two studies, n = 2,232 individuals participate in treatments where we vary across participants the relative benefit from contributing to a public good (that is, the marginal per capita return, the MPCR). We examine decisions from alternative participant pools (UK general population vs. students), implementations varying the physical distance between participants (online vs. in the laboratory), and more complex decision settings considering group-to-group interactions including not only providers but also donors to public goods. Throughout, neither average contribution levels, nor the distribution of contributions are significantly affected by the increases in cooperation benefits. The mechanism behind these results can be explained by the close correlation between expectations of other's cooperation and own cooperation, and the fact that these expectations do not increase with higher benefits from cooperation.

Explaining Cooperative Behavior in Public Goods Games: How Preferences and Beliefs Affect Contribution Levels

Cooperation and Charity in Spatial Public Goods Game under Different Strategy Update Rules

Confusion cannot explain cooperative behavior in public goods games

Human cooperation in changing groups in a large-scale public goods game

Cooperation and confusion in public goods games: confusion cannot explain contribution patterns

Beyond a binary theorizing of prosociality

Cooperation in public goods experiments with random and finite stopping rules

Long-term evidence on cooperation and cultural differences in public goods dilemmas

Prosocial preferences do not explain human cooperation in public-goods games

Changes in Cooperative Behaviour and Belief in Finitely Repeated Social Dilemmas

Increasing benefits in one-time public goods does not promote cooperation

Cooperative Behavior in the Ultimatum Game and Prisoner's Dilemma Depends on Players' Contributions.

Self-interested learning is more important than fair-minded conditional cooperation in public-goods games

Asymmetric effects of social and economic incentives on cooperation in real effort based public goods games

Conditional cooperation and confusion in public-goods experiments

Selfish learning is more important than fair-minded conditional cooperation in public-goods games

Herd Behaviour in Public Goods Games

The Public Goods Game with a New Form of Shared Reward

Diversity of contribution promotes cooperation in public goods games

Bounded Rationality in Volunteering Public Goods Games.

Cooperative behavior cascades in human social networks