Cited by 62Experimental Behavioral Economics StudiesEvolutionary Game Theory and CooperationGame Theory and Applications

Humans choose representatives who enforce cooperation in social dilemmas through extortion

Open access
Milinski, Manfred, Hilbe, Christian, Semmann, Dirk, Sommerfeld, Ralf, Marotzke, Jochem·2016·Nature Communications

Abstract

Social dilemmas force players to balance between personal and collective gain. In many dilemmas, such as elected governments negotiating climate-change mitigation measures, the decisions are made not by individual players but by their representatives. However, the behaviour of representatives in social dilemmas has not been investigated experimentally. Here inspired by the negotiations for greenhouse-gas emissions reductions, we experimentally study a collective-risk social dilemma that involves representatives deciding on behalf of their fellow group members. Representatives can be re-elected or voted out after each consecutive collective-risk game. Selfish players are preferentially elected and are hence found most frequently in the ‘representatives’ treatment. Across all treatments, we identify the selfish players as extortioners. As predicted by our mathematical model, their steadfast strategies enforce cooperation from fair players who finally compensate almost completely the deficit caused by the extortionate co-players. Everybody gains, but the extortionate representatives and their groups gain the most.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/ncomms10915

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. IPCC. in Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change eds Solomon Susanet al. Cambridge Univ. Press (2007).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Milinski, M., Hilbe, C., Semmann, D., Sommerfeld, R., & Marotzke, J.
Affiliations
  • Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology (DE)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Max Planck Institute for Meteorology (DE)
Corresponding author
  • Milinski, Manfred
  • Hilbe, Christian
  • Marotzke, Jochem
Venue
Nature Communications
Published
2016-03-07
Volume
7
Issue
1
Pages
10915-10915
ISSN
2041-1723 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2294583806
Cited by
62
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 2
FWCI
15.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Communications (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Max-Planck-Gesellschaft
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Evolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Game Theory and Applications
Keywords
social dilemmas, elected officials, extortion, cooperation enforcement, greenhouse gas emissions reduction, climate change negotiations
MeSH terms
Cooperative Behavior, Female, Game Theory, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Models, Theoretical, Young Adult, Climate Change

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review