Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36854880›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

Assortativity in cognition.

Ennio Bilancini, Leonardo Boncinelli, Eugenio Vicario

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Ennio Bilancini *IMT School for Advanced Studies Lucca, Laboratory for the Analysis of compleX Economic Systems, Piazza S. Francesco 19, 55100, Lucca, Italy.
Leonardo Boncinelli *Department of Economics and Business, University of Florence, Via delle Pandette 9, 50127, Florence, Italy.
Eugenio Vicario *Department of Economics and Business, University of Florence, Via delle Pandette 9, 50127, Florence, Italy. eugenio.vicario@unifi.it.

Funding

Ministero dell'Istruzione, dell'Università e della Ricerca 20178293XT
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In pairwise interactions, where two individuals meet and play a social game with each other, assortativity in cognition means that pairs where both decision-makers use the same cognitive process are more likely to occur than what happens under random matching. In this paper, we show theoretically that assortativity in cognition may arise as a consequence of assortativity in other dimensions. Moreover, we analyze an applied model where we investigate the effects of assortativity in cognition on the emergence of cooperation and on the degree of prosociality of intuition and deliberation, which are the typical cognitive processes postulated by the dual process theory in psychology. In particular, with assortativity in cognition, deliberation is able to shape the intuitive heuristic toward cooperation, increasing the degree of prosociality of intuition, and ultimately promoting the overall cooperation. Our findings rely on agent-based simulations, but analytical results are also obtained in a special case. We conclude with examples involving different payoff matrices of the underlying social games, showing that assortativity in cognition can have non-trivial implications in terms of its societal desirability.

Identifiers

PMID36854880
PMCPMC9974973

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.