Data from: Do people imitate when making decisions? - evidence from a spatial prisoners dilemma experiment

How do people decide which action to take? This question is best answered
using Game Theory, which has proposed a series of decision mechanisms that
people potentially use. In network simulations, wherein games are repeated
and payoff differences can be observed, those mechanisms rely often on
imitation of successful behavior. Surprisingly, little to no evidence has
been provided about whether, how and what people actually use to alter
their actions in that context. By comparing two experimental treatments
wherein participants play in a network the iterated Prisoner's
Dilemma game, we aim to answer whether more successful actions are
imitated. Whereas in the first treatment, participants have the
possibility to use payoff differences in making their decision, the second
treatment hinders such imitation as no information about the gains is
provided. If imitation of the more successful plays a role then there
should be a difference in how players switch from cooperation to defection
between both treatments. Although, cooperation and payoff levels appear
not to be significantly different between both treatments, detailed
analysis shows that there are behavioral differences: When confronted with
a more successful co-player, the focal player will imitate that behavior
as the switching is related to the experienced payoff inequality.

人们如何抉择自身的行动方案？这一问题可通过博弈论（Game Theory）得到最佳解答，该理论已提出一系列人类可能采用的决策机制。
在网络模拟场景中，博弈将重复进行且收益差异可被观测，此类决策机制往往依赖于对成功行为的模仿。令人意外的是，目前几乎尚无证据能够证实，在该场景下人们是否、以何种方式以及通过何种要素实际调整自身行动。
本研究通过两项实验处理的对比展开探究，让参与者在网络环境中开展重复囚徒困境（iterated Prisoner's Dilemma）博弈，旨在解答“是否存在对更优行为的模仿”这一核心问题。
在第一项实验处理中，参与者可借助收益差异辅助决策；而第二项实验处理则阻断了此类模仿路径，因为未向参与者提供任何收益相关信息。
若对更优行为的模仿确实发挥作用，则两项处理中玩家从合作转向背叛（defection）的行为模式应存在显著差异。
尽管两项处理下的合作水平与收益水平看似并无显著差异，但细致的行为分析表明二者存在本质区别：当焦点参与者（focal player）面对表现更优的同局搭档（co-player）时，其会模仿对方的行为，因为行为转换与个体感知到的收益不平等程度直接相关。