Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Behavioural economics

Occasional errors can benefit coordination

  • News & Views
  • Published:

From Nature

View current issue Submit your manuscript

The chances of solving a problem that involves coordination between people are increased by introducing robotic players that sometimes make mistakes. This finding has implications for real-world coordination problems. See Letter p.370

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1: Noise helps to resolve coordination problems.

References

  1. Turchin, P. Ultrasociety: How 10,000 Years of War Made Humans the Greatest Cooperators on Earth (Beresta, 2016).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Shirado, H. & Christakis, N. A. Nature 545, 370–374 (2017).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Kearns, M., Suri, S. & Montfort, N. Science 313, 824–827 (2006).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Kandori, M., Mailath, G. J. & Rob, R. Econometrica 61, 29–56 (1993).

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. Young, H. P. Individual Strategy and Social Structure: An Evolutionary Theory of Institutions (Princeton Univ. Press, 1998).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bowles, S. Microeconomics: Behavior, Institutions, and Evolution (Princeton Univ. Press, 2003).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  7. Weidenholzer, S. Games 1, 551–585 (2010).

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Harsanyi, J. C. & Selten, R. A General Theory of Equilibrium Selection in Games (MIT Press, 1988).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Van Huyck, J. B., Battalio, R. C. & Beil, R. O. Am. Econ. Rev. 80, 234–248 (1990).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Crawford, V. P. Econometrica 63, 103–143 (1995).

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  11. Camerer, C. F. Behavioral Game Theory: Experiments in Strategic Interaction (Princeton Univ. Press, 2003).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Cassar, A. Games Econ. Behav. 58, 209–230 (2007).

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Buskens, V. & Snijders, C. Dynam. Games Appl. 6, 477–494 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. the Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, UK

    Simon Gächter

Authors
  1. Simon Gächter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Simon Gächter.

Related audio

Related links

Related links

Related links in Nature Research

Behavioural economics: Visible inequality breeds more inequality

Behavioural economics: Corruption corrupts

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gächter, S. Occasional errors can benefit coordination. Nature 545, 297–298 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/545297a

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/545297a

  • Springer Nature Limited

This article is cited by

Search

Navigation