Split or Steal? Cooperative Behavior When the Stakes Are Large

@article{Assem2012SplitOS,
  title={Split or Steal? Cooperative Behavior When the Stakes Are Large},
  author={Martijn J. van den Assem and Dennie van Dolder and Richard H. Thaler},
  journal={Behavioral \& Experimental Finance (Editor's Choice) eJournal},
  year={2012}
}
We examine cooperative behavior when large sums of money are at stake, using data from the television game show Golden Balls. At the end of each episode, contestants play a variant on the classic prisoner's dilemma for large and widely ranging stakes averaging over $20,000. Cooperation is surprisingly high for amounts that would normally be considered consequential but look tiny in their current context, what we call a “big peanuts” phenomenon. Utilizing the prior interaction among contestants… 
Correlates of Cooperation in a One-Shot High-Stakes Televised Prisoners' Dilemma
TLDR
Golden balls is a televised game show that uses the prisoners' dilemma, with a diverse range of participants, often playing for very large stakes, and it is found that contestants were sensitive to the stakes involved, cooperating less when the stakes were larger in both absolute and relative terms.
Golden balls: A prisoner's dilemma experiment
We analyze cooperative behavior in a prisoner’s dilemma game with high stakes, face-to-face communication, and two rounds of pre-play in which the two final contestants are endogenously selected via
Moral Bargain Hunters Purchase Moral Righteousness When it is Cheap: Within-Individual Effect of Stake Size in Economic Games
TLDR
It is shown that stake size strongly affects a player’s cooperation choices in prisoner's dilemma games when stake size is manipulated within each individual such that each player faces different stake sizes, and participants were ‘moral bargain hunters’ who purchased moral righteousness at a low price when they were provided with a ‘price list’ of prosocial behaviours.
Malleable Lies: Communication and Cooperation in a High Stakes TV Game Show
TLDR
The empirical analysis shows that statements that carry an element of conditionality or implicitness are associated with a lower likelihood of cooperation, and confirms that malleability is a good criterion for judging the credibility of cheap talk.
Friend or Foe? Cooperation and Learning in High-Stakes Games
Why do people frequently cooperate in defiance of their immediate incentives? One explanation is that individuals are conditionally cooperative. As an explanation of behavior in one-shot settings,
Cooperative Behavior in the Ultimatum Game and Prisoner’s Dilemma Depends on Players’ Contributions
TLDR
Adapted computerized UG and PD games, in which relative contributions from each player were manipulated, were administered and found that players’ contribution had large effects on cooperative behavior.
Large Losses from Little Lies: Randomly Assigned Opportunity to Misrepresent Substantially Lowers Later Cooperation and Worsens Income Inequality
Social media has made anonymized behavior online a prevalent part of many people’s daily interactions. The implications of this new ability to hide one’s identity information remain imperfectly
Solving the simultaneous truel in The Weakest Link: Nash or revenge?
How Lies Induced Cooperation in 'Golden Balls': A Game-Theoretic Analysis
We analyze a particular episode of a popular British TV game show, “Golden Balls,” in which one of the two contestants lied about what he intended to do, which had the salutary effect of inducing
Gender and Willingness to Compete for High Stakes
We examine gender differences in competitiveness, using a TV game show where the winner of an elimination competition plays a game of chance worth hundreds of thousands of euros. At several stages of
...
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 122 REFERENCES
Friend or Foe? Cooperation and Learning in High-Stakes Games
Why do people frequently cooperate in defiance of their immediate incentives? One explanation is that individuals are conditionally cooperative. As an explanation of behavior in one-shot settings,
Game Shows and Economic Behavior: Risk-Taking on “Card Sharks”
This paper studies individual risk-taking behavior with a unique data set: risky decisions of contestants during the threeyear history of the television game show, "Card Sharks." In the bonus round
Games and Discrimination: Lessons from the Weakest Link
Empirically determining whether wage differentials arise because of discrimination is extremely difficult, and distinguishing between different theories of discrimination is harder still. This paper
High Stakes and Acceptance Behavior in Ultimatum Bargaining:
This paper presents the results of a within-subject experiment testing whether an increase in the monetary stakes by a factor of 50 – which had never been done before – influences individual behavior
Experiments with N-Person Social Traps I
Subjects for single play experiments with n-person social traps (strong and weak versions of Prisoner's Dilemma, Volunteer's Dilemma, Largest Number) were recruited from several populations:
On expectations and the monetary stakes in ultimatum games
In an ultimatum game, player 1 makes an offer of $X from a total of $M to player 2. If player 2 accepts the offer, then player 1 is paid $(M-X) and player 2 receives $X; if player 2 rejects the
Learning to Accept in Ultimatum Games: Evidence from an Experimental Design that Generates Low Offers
Focusing on responder behavior, we report panel data findings from both low and high stakes ultimatum bargaining games. Whereas Slonim and Roth (1998) find that offers are rejected fairly equally
Truth or Consequences: An Experiment
TLDR
Evidence that the willingness to punish an unfair action is sensitive to whether this action was preceded by a deceptive message is presented, and whether receivers' rates of monetary sacrifice depend on the process by which an outcome is reached is tested.
...
...