Peig online text3/28/2023 Lambsdorff, “ Consequences and causes of corruption-what do we know from a cross-section of countries?” (2006) pp. Thies, “ Deterring cheating in online environments,” ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 22, 1– 23 (2015). Lee, “ Effects of the bas and bis on decision-making in a gambling task,” Personality and Individual Differences 50, 1131– 1135 (2011), special Issue on Anxiety (dedicated to the memory of Professor Blazej Szymura). Maher, “ Episodic chasing in pathological gamblers using the iowa gambling task,” Scandinavian journal of psychology 47, 43– 9 (2006). Zuckerman, “ ‘chasing’ in gambling behavior: personality and cognitive determinants,” Personality and Individual Differences 27, 1097– 1111 (1999). Bibby, “ Loss-chasing, alexithymia, and impulsivity in a gambling task: Alexithymia as a precursor to loss-chasing behavior when gambling,” Frontiers in Psychology 7, 3 (2016). Wiltermuth, “ Cheating more when the spoils are split,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 115, 157– 168 (2011). Shalvi, “ The collaborative roots of corruption,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 112, 10651– 10656 (2015). Rose-Ackerman, “ Political corruption and democracy,” Connecticut Journal of International Law 14 (1999). Bonabeau, “ Agent-based modeling: Methods and techniques for simulating human systems,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 99, 7280– 7287 (2002). Elliott, “ Adaptive agents, intelligence, and emergent human organization: Capturing complexity through agent-based modeling,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 99, 7187– 7188 (2002). Mantzavinos ( Cambridge University Press, 2008). Woodward, “ Why do people cooperate as much as they do?” in Philosophy of the Social Sciences: Philosophical Theory and Scientific Practice, edited by C. Gintis, “ A cooperative species: Human reciprocity and its evolution,” (2011). Finally, the differences between the reported die-values provide an insight that the behavior of the first player may motivate the corrupt behavior of the second player in a pair. An initially honest population becomes a cheating population such that in the presence of losing tolerance, a player can never be completely honest in the entire duration of the game. We find that every time a player gains a chance to cheat after losing one round, the number of reported doubles is inflated. An agent-based model is created following the rules of the game and is modified to explore the effects of the ratio of honest players when players have a losing tolerance. Regardless of sex, the players reported a significantly higher number of doubles than expected assuming complete honesty. The total points accumulated by a pair earn them a reward according to a set matrix. Here, all-male and all-female pairs play 20 rounds of the game where they gain points if they report the same number, referred to as a double. This study explores one of its negative effects, commonly known as corruption, by adopting a die-rolling game that has been previously reported to capture the emergence of corrupt tendencies of players. Cooperation among humans is necessary to accomplish tasks that are difficult to do alone.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |