ArticleJournal of the Royal Society, Interface2025
Cooperative bots exhibit nuanced effects on cooperation across strategic frameworks.
Article in Journal of the Royal Society, Interface, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Stigmergic influence of simple bots on human cooperation in digital environments.EPJ data science · 2026Article
- The evolutionary advantage of guilt: co-evolution of social and non-social guilt in structured populations.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2025Article
- Cooperative bots exhibit nuanced effects on cooperation across strategic frameworks.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The positive impact of cooperative bots on cooperation within evolutionary game theory is well-documented. However, prior studies predominantly use discrete strategic frameworks with deterministic actions. This article explores continuous and mixed strategic approaches. Continuous strategies use intermediate probabilities for varying degrees of cooperation and focus on expected payoffs, while mixed strategies calculate immediate payoffs from actions taken within these probabilities. Using the prisoner's dilemma game, this study examines the effects of cooperative bots on human cooperation in both well-mixed and structured populations across these strategic approaches. Our findings reveal that cooperative bots significantly enhance cooperation in both population types under weak imitation scenarios, where players are less concerned with material gains. Conversely, under strong imitation scenarios, cooperative bots do not alter the defective equilibrium in well-mixed populations but have varied impacts in structured populations. Specifically, they disrupt cooperation under discrete and continuous strategies but facilitate it under mixed strategies. These results highlight the nuanced effects of cooperative bots within different strategic frameworks and underscore the need for careful deployment, as their effectiveness is highly sensitive to how humans update their actions and their chosen strategic approach.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.