↓ Skip to main content

Empathy Emerges Spontaneously in the Ultimatum Game: Small Groups and Networks

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, September 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
62 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Empathy Emerges Spontaneously in the Ultimatum Game: Small Groups and Networks
Published in
PLOS ONE, September 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0043781
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jaime Iranzo, Luis M. Floría, Yamir Moreno, Angel Sánchez

Abstract

The Ultimatum game, in which one subject proposes how to share a pot and the other has veto power on the proposal, in which case both lose everything, is a paradigmatic scenario to probe the degree of cooperation and altruism in human subjects. It has been shown that if individuals are empathic, i.e., they play the game having in mind how their opponent will react by offering an amount that they themselves would accept, then non-rational large offers well above the smallest possible ones are evolutionarily selected. We here show that empathy itself may be selected and need not be exogenously imposed provided that interactions take place only with a fraction of the total population, and that the role of proposer or responder is randomly changed from round to round. These empathic agents, that displace agents with independent (uncorrelated) offers and proposals, behave far from what is expected rationally, offering and accepting sizable fractions of the amount to be shared. Specific values for the typical offer depend on the details of the interacion network and on the existence of hubs, but they are almost always significantly larger than zero, indicating that the mechanism at work here is quite general and could explain the emergence of empathy in very many different contexts.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Finland 1 2%
Netherlands 1 2%
Unknown 48 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 22%
Student > Bachelor 8 16%
Student > Master 7 14%
Researcher 6 12%
Student > Postgraduate 4 8%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 9 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 16 31%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 14%
Physics and Astronomy 4 8%
Computer Science 3 6%
Mathematics 2 4%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 13 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 June 2014.
All research outputs
#4,874,723
of 23,866,543 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#71,102
of 203,926 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,207
of 173,454 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#966
of 4,424 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,866,543 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 203,926 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 173,454 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,424 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.