Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39934104›Full record

ArticleNature communications2025

Dynamics of cooperation in concurrent games.

Charlotte S L Rossetti, Oliver P Hauser, Christian Hilbe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2025. 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.

Charlotte S L RossettiMax Planck Research Group on the Dynamics of Social Behavior, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology, 24306, Plön, Germany. rossetti@evolbio.mpg.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0008-0376-1514
Oliver P Hauser *Department of Economics, University of Exeter, Exeter, EX4 4PU, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9282-0801
Christian Hilbe *Max Planck Research Group on the Dynamics of Social Behavior, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology, 24306, Plön, Germany. hilbe@evolbio.mpg.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5116-955X

Funding

EC | Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation H2020) 850529
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

People frequently encounter situations where individually optimal decisions conflict with group interests. To navigate such social dilemmas, they often employ simple heuristics based on direct reciprocity: cooperate when others do and cease cooperation when partners defect. However, prior research typically assumes that individuals only interact in one game at a time. In reality, people engage in multiple games concurrently, and the outcome of one interaction can influence behavior in another. Here, we introduce a theoretical framework to study the resulting cross-over and spill-over effects. Participants repeatedly engage in two independent stage games, either with the same or different partners, adapting their strategies over time through an evolutionary learning process. Our findings indicate that individuals often link their behavior across games, particularly under cognitive constraints like imperfect recall. A behavioral experiment with 316 UK-based students suggests that concurrent games negatively affect cooperation, highlighting how strategic motives and spillovers impact reciprocity.

Indexed as

Cooperative BehaviorGame TheoryAdolescentAdultDecision MakingFemaleGames, ExperimentalHumansInterpersonal RelationsMaleMotivationYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID39934104
PMCPMC11814277

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.