Abstract
The symmetric Volunteer’s dilemma game (VOD) models a situation in which each of N actors faces the decision of either producing a step-level collective good (action “C”) or freeriding (“D”). One player’s cooperative action suffices for producing the collective good. Unilateral cooperation yields a payoff U for D-players and U - K for the cooperative player(s). However, if all actors decide for “freeriding”, each player’s payoff is zero (U > K > 0). In this article, an essential modification is discussed. In an asymmetric VOD, the interest in the collective good and/or the production costs (i.e. work) may vary between actors. The generalized asymmetric VOD is similar to market entry games. Alternative hypotheses abaout the behavior of subjects are derived from a game-theoretical analysis. They are investigated in an experimental setting. The application of the mixed Nash-equilibrium concept yields a rather counter-intuitive prediction which apparently contradicts the empirical data. The predictions of the Harsanyi-Selten-theory and Schelling’s “focal point theory” are in better accordance with the data. However, they do not account for the “diffusion-of-responsibility-effect” also observable in the context of an asymmetric VOD game.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Brennan, G., & Lomasky, L. (1984). Inefficient unanimity. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 7, 151–163.
Darley, J.M., & Latané, B. (1968). Bystander intervention in emergencies. Diffusion of responsibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8, 377–383.
Dawkins, R. (1976). The selfish gene. New York: Oxford University Press.
Diekmann, A. (1985). Volunteer’s dilemma. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 29, 605–610.
Diekmann, A. (1986). Volunteer’s dilemma. A ’social trap’ without dominant strategy and some experimental results. In A. Diekmann & P. Mitter (Eds.), Paradoxical effects of social behaviour. Essays in honor of Anatol Rapoport. Heidelberg, Wien: Physica.
Harsanyi, J.C., & Selten, R. (1988). A general theory of equilibrium selection in games. Cambridge, Mass: M.I.T. Press.
Holler, M. (1990). The unprofitability of mixed strategy equilibrium in two-person games. A second folk-theorem. Economic Letters, 32, 319–323.
Olson, M. (1965). The logic of collective action. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Selten, R., & Güth, W. (1982). Equilibrium point selection in a class of market entry games. In M. Deistler, E. Fürst, & G. Schwödiauer (Eds.), Games, economic dynamics, and time series analysis — A symposium in memoriam of Oskar Morgenstern (pp. 101–116). Würzburg, Wien: Physica.
Schelling, Th.C. (1960). The strategy of conflict. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press
Sherman, R., & Willet, Th.D. (1967). Potential entrants discourage entry. Journal of Political Economy, 75, 400–403.
Wittman, D. (1985). Counter-intuitive results in game theory. European Journal of Political Economy, 1, 77–85.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1984 Springer-Verlag Berlin · Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Diekmann, A. (1984). Cooperation in an asymmetric volunteer’s dilemma game Theory and experimental evidence. In: Schulz, U., Albers, W., Mueller, U. (eds) Social Dilemmas and Cooperation. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-78860-4_21
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-78860-4_21
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-78862-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-78860-4
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive