• Boissevain, J. Friends of Friends: Networks, Manipulators and Coalitions (Basil Blackwell, 1974).


    Google Scholar
     

  • Watts, D. J., Dodds, P. S. & Newman, M. E. J. Identity and search in social networks. Science 296, 1302–1305 (2002).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Fowler, J. H. & Christakis, N. A. Social networks and cooperation in hunter-gatherers. Nature 481, 497–501 (2012).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Henrich, J. & Muthukrishna, M. The origins and psychology of human cooperation. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 72, 207–240 (2021).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Fehr, E. & Fischbacher, U. The nature of human altruism. Nature 425, 785–791 (2003).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Rand, D. G. & Nowak, M. A. Human cooperation. Trends Cogn. Sci. 17, 413–425 (2013).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Ohtsuki, H., Hauert, C., Lieberman, E. & Nowak, M. A. A simple rule for the evolution of cooperation on graphs and social networks. Nature 441, 502–505 (2006).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Santos, F. C., Santos, M. D. & Pacheco, J. M. Social diversity promotes the emergence of cooperation in public goods games. Nature 454, 213–216 (2008).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Fowler, J. H. & Christakis, N. A. Cooperative behavior cascades in human social networks. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 5334–5338 (2010).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Szabó, G. & Fath, G. Evolutionary games on graphs. Phys. Rep. 446, 97–216 (2007).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Bliege Bird, R., Ready, E. & Power, E. A. The social significance of subtle signals. Nat. Hum. Behav. 2, 452–457 (2018).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Goyal, S. Networks: An Economics Approach (MIT Press, 2023).


    Google Scholar
     

  • Thielmann, I., Spadaro, G. & Balliet, D. Personality and prosocial behavior: a theoretical framework and meta-analysis. Psychol. Bull. 146, 30–90 (2020).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • van Dijk, E. & De Dreu, C. K. W. Experimental games and social decision making. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 72, 415–438 (2021).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Rapoport, A., Chammah, A. M. & Orwant, C. J. Prisoner’s Dilemma: A Study in Conflict and Cooperation (Univ. Michigan Press, 1965).

    Book 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Berg, J., Dickhaut, J. & McCabe, K. Trust, reciprocity, and social history. Games Econ. Behav. 10, 122–142 (1995).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Güth, W., Schmittberger, R. & Schwarze, B. An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 3, 367–388 (1982).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Camerer, C. F. Behavioral Game Theory: Experiments in Strategic Interaction (Princeton Univ. Press, 2011).


    Google Scholar
     

  • Kagel, J. H. & Roth, A. E. The Handbook of Experimental Economics 2 (Princeton Univ. Press, 2020).

    Book 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Dal Bó, P. & Fréchette, G. R. The evolution of cooperation in infinitely repeated games: experimental evidence. Am. Econ. Rev. 101, 411–429 (2011).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Bó, P. D. Cooperation under the shadow of the future: experimental evidence from infinitely repeated games. Am. Econ. Rev. 95, 1591–1604 (2005).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Battiston, F. et al. Networks beyond pairwise interactions: structure and dynamics. Phys. Rep. 874, 1–92 (2020).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Jusup, M. et al. Social physics. Phys. Rep. 948, 1–148 (2022).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Gracia-Lázaro, C. et al. Heterogeneous networks do not promote cooperation when humans play a prisoner’s dilemma. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 12922–12926 (2012).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Rand, D. G., Nowak, M. A., Fowler, J. H. & Christakis, N. A. Static network structure can stabilize human cooperation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 17093–17098 (2014).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Perc, M. & Szolnoki, A. Coevolutionary games—a mini review. BioSystems 99, 109–125 (2010).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Perc, M., Gómez-Gardenes, J., Szolnoki, A., Floría, L. M. & Moreno, Y. Evolutionary dynamics of group interactions on structured populations: a review. J. R. Soc. Interface 10, 20120997 (2013).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Fehl, K., van der Post, D. J. & Semmann, D. Co-evolution of behaviour and social network structure promotes human cooperation. Ecol. Lett. 14, 546–551 (2011).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Rand, D. G., Arbesman, S. & Christakis, N. A. Dynamic social networks promote cooperation in experiments with humans. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 19193–19198 (2011).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Melamed, D., Harrell, A. & Simpson, B. Cooperation, clustering, and assortative mixing in dynamic networks. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, 951–956 (2018).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Su, Q., McAvoy, A. & Plotkin, J. B. Evolution of cooperation with contextualized behavior. Sci. Adv. 8, eabm6066 (2022).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Jia, D. et al. Evolutionary dynamics drives role specialization in a community of players. J. R. Soc. Interface 17, 20200174 (2020).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Su, Q., Li, A. & Wang, L. Evolution of cooperation with interactive identity and diversity. J. Theor. Biol. 442, 149–157 (2018).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • McAvoy, A. & Hauert, C. Asymmetric evolutionary games. PLoS Comput. Biol. 11, e1004,349 (2015).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Su, Q., Allen, B. & Plotkin, J. B. Evolution of cooperation with asymmetric social interactions. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 119, e2113468118 (2022).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Hübner, V., Staab, M., Hilbe, C., Chatterjee, K. & Kleshnina, M. Efficiency and resilience of cooperation in asymmetric social dilemmas. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 121, e2315558121 (2024).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Peysakhovich, A., Nowak, M. A. & Rand, D. G. Humans display a ‘cooperative phenotype’ that is domain general and temporally stable. Nat. Commun. 5, 4939 (2014).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Poncela-Casasnovas, J. et al. Humans display a reduced set of consistent behavioral phenotypes in dyadic games. Sci. Adv. 2, e1600451 (2016).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Engle-Warnick, J. & Slonim, R. L. Learning to trust in indefinitely repeated games. Games Econ. Behav. 54, 95–114 (2006).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • King-Casas, B. et al. The rupture and repair of cooperation in borderline personality disorder. Science 321, 806–810 (2008).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Güth, W. & Kocher, M. G. More than thirty years of ultimatum bargaining experiments: motives, variations, and a survey of the recent literature. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 108, 396–409 (2014).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Han, X. et al. Emergence of communities and diversity in social networks. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 2887–2891 (2017).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Cherry, T. L., Kroll, S. & Shogren, J. F. The impact of endowment heterogeneity and origin on public good contributions: evidence from the lab. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 57, 357–365 (2005).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Nishi, A., Shirado, H., Rand, D. G. & Christakis, N. A. Inequality and visibility of wealth in experimental social networks. Nature 526, 426–429 (2015).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Hauser, O. P., Hilbe, C., Chatterjee, K. & Nowak, M. A. Social dilemmas among unequals. Nature 572, 524–527 (2019).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Camerer, C.F., Fehr, E. in Foundations of Human Sociality (eds. Henrich, J. et al.) 55–59 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2004).

  • Galesic, M. et al. Human social sensing is an untapped resource for computational social science. Nature 595, 214–222 (2021).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Balliet, D., Wu, J. & De Dreu, C. K. W. Ingroup favoritism in cooperation: a meta-analysis. Psychol. Bull. 140, 1556–1581 (2014).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Romano, A., Balliet, D., Yamagishi, T. & Liu, J. H. Parochial trust and cooperation across 17 societies. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 12702–12707 (2017).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Sohn, Y., Choi, J. K. & Ahn, T. K. Core-periphery segregation in evolving prisoner’s dilemma networks. J. Complex Netw. 8, cnz021 (2019).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Almaatouq, A. et al. Scaling up experimental social, behavioral, and economic science. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/wksv8_v1 (2021).

  • Shi, L. et al. Freedom of choice adds value to public goods. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 30, 17,516–17,521 (2020).

  • Tomasello, M., Melis, A. P., Tennie, C., Wyman, E. & Herrmann, E. Two key steps in the evolution of human cooperation: the interdependence hypothesis. Curr. Anthropol. 53, 673–692 (2012).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Chen, D. L., Schonger, M. & Wickens, C. otree—an open-source platform for laboratory, online, and field experiments. J. Behav. Exp. Finance 9, 88–97 (2016).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Kim, D. G. Clustering Standard Errors at the ‘Session’ Level (CESifo, 2020).

  • Abadie, A., Athey, S., Imbens, G. W. & Wooldridge, J. M. When should you adjust standard errors for clustering? Q. J. Econ. 138, 1–35 (2023).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Charrad, M., Ghazzali, N., Boiteau, V. & Niknafs, A. NbClust: an R package for determining the relevant number of clusters in a data set. J. Stat. Softw. 61, 1–36 (2014).

    Article 

    Google Scholar