This research is part of the UnMiSSeD project supported by the European Media & Information Fund (EMIF), and examined how science and misinformation interact in online debates.

These results show that cooperation depends strongly on context, incentives, and social dynamics. The model captures these nuances and offers a framework to explore how policies—or even AI-driven systems—might promote collective welfare in society 🤖

3️⃣ Finally, when decisions are made under time pressure, both people and our model respond less cautiously. This leads to a short-term increase in cooperation—suggesting that intuitive, fast decisions may favor collective over self-interested behavior.

2️⃣ We also find that modifying the payoff structure strongly affects outcomes. Rewarding cooperation or punishing defection both increase cooperative behavior, but punishment proves particularly effective at sustaining it over repeated interactions.

The results:

1️⃣ Our model replicates key patterns of human cooperation in multiplayer social dilemmas. Cooperation typically declines over time, as individuals learn that defection can be more rewarding. Yet, when groups are reshuffled, cooperation rises again—reflecting a temporary reset of trust.

We applied it to a multiplayer Prisoner’s Dilemma, where players repeatedly choose whether to cooperate or defect. Linking model parameters to social factors like rewards, group composition, and time pressure revealed how cooperation evolves over time.

🎯 To study how people make these choices, we used the Drift Diffusion Model—a neurocognitive framework describing how the brain gradually accumulates evidence before deciding.

💭Human decision-making is shaped by emotions, biases, and social pressures. When choices involve others, they become social decisions—whether to cooperate, compete, or conform. Cooperation is vital for trust and progress, yet fragile when personal incentives favor defection.