Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Jan 20;12:29-37.
doi: 10.2147/NSS.S237402. eCollection 2020.

Sleep Deprivation Impairs Cooperative Behavior Selectively: Evidence From Prisoner's and Chicken Dilemmas

Affiliations
Free PMC article

Sleep Deprivation Impairs Cooperative Behavior Selectively: Evidence From Prisoner's and Chicken Dilemmas

Yi Lin et al. Nat Sci Sleep. .
Free PMC article

Abstract

Objective: The aim of our study was to investigate the influences of acute sleep deprivation on cooperation with two classical social dilemmas, the Prisoner's dilemma (PD) and the chicken dilemma (CD).

Methods: All participants (N=24) were required to come for the experiments twice; one time for normal sleep condition, the other time for sleep deprivation condition, with a counter-balanced sequence. In the following afternoon, participants completed the psychomotor vigilance task (PVT) and two social dilemmas tasks, as well as the Karolinska Sleepiness Scale (KSS), the Risk Orientation Questionnaire (ROQ) and the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS).

Results: Our results demonstrated that sleep deprivation significantly impaired cooperative behaviors in the CD but not in the PD. In addition, this detrimental effect was not related with the alteration in the risk-seeking, objective alertness, subjective sleepiness, and mood.

Conclusion: The current findings revealed that sleep deprivation impairs cooperative behaviors under social dilemmas selectively. However, the underlying mechanism remains to further explore with neuroimaging studies and better ecological approach.

Keywords: cooperation; risk-seeking; sleep deprivation.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
(A) Payoff matrix for general structure. (B) Payoff matrix for the prisoner’s dilemma. (C) Payoff matrix for the chicken dilemma. Abbreviations: C, cooperation; D, detection; P, punishment; R, reward; S, sucker; T, temptation.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Experimental protocol of normal sleep and sleep deprivation conditions.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Cooperation rates for CD and PD under normal sleep and sleep deprivation condition. Note: *p=0.007. Abbreviations: CD, chicken dilemma; PD, prisoner’s dilemma.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. The cooperative human. Nat Hum Behav. 2018;2:427–428. doi:10.1038/s41562-018-0389-1 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Axelrod R, Hamilton WD. The evolution of cooperation. Science. 1981;211(4489):1390–1396. doi:10.1126/science.7466396 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Smith JM, Price GR. The logic of animal conflict. Nature. 1973;246(5427):15. doi:10.1038/246015a0 - DOI
    1. Lipman BL. Cooperation among egoists in prisoners’ dilemma and chicken games. Public Choice. 1986;51(3):315–331. doi:10.1007/bf00128880 - DOI
    1. De Heus P, Hoogervorst N, Van Dijk E. Framing prisoners and chickens: valence effects in the prisoner’s dilemma and the chicken game. J Exp Soc Psychol. 2010;46(5):736–742. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2010.04.013 - DOI

LinkOut - more resources

Feedback