Prosocial preferences do not explain human cooperation in public-goods games

Area of Science:

• Behavioral Economics
• Social Psychology
• Experimental Economics

Background:

• The concept of prosocial preferences suggests humans cooperate beyond self-interest.
• Previous evidence for prosocial preferences is largely inferred from economic game outcomes.
• Direct experimental tests of prosocial preferences are lacking.

Purpose of the Study:

• To experimentally test the influence of awareness of consequences on cooperation in a public-goods game.
• To investigate whether informing individuals about benefits to others affects cooperation levels.
• To challenge the prevailing prosocial preferences hypothesis.

Main Methods:

• Utilized a public-goods game experimental design.
• Manipulated participants' knowledge of how their actions impacted other players.
• Compared cooperation levels across different information conditions.

Main Results:

• Cooperation levels remained similar regardless of whether participants knew their actions benefited others.
• Increased awareness of benefits to others led to decreased cooperation.
• Cooperation outcomes varied, sometimes lower and sometimes higher than predicted, based on experimental design.

Conclusions:

• Findings contradict the established role of the prosocial preferences hypothesis in explaining cooperation.
• Human behavior in economic games is complex and can yield misleading conclusions.
• Experimental design significantly influences observed cooperation, highlighting the need for nuanced interpretations.