Science Advances

Supplementary Materials

This PDF file includes:

  • Technical implementation of the experiment
  • Running the experiment
  • Translated transcript of the tutorial and feedback screen after each round
  • Other experimental results
  • fig. S1. System architecture.
  • fig. S2. Age distribution of the participants in our experiment.
  • fig. S3. Screenshots of the tutorial shown to participants before starting the experiment and feedback screen after a typical round of the game.
  • fig. S4. Fraction of cooperative actions for young (≤15 years old) and adult players (>16 years old) and relative difference between the two heatmaps: (young − adults)/adults.
  • fig. S5. Fraction of separate cooperative actions for males and females and relative difference between the two heatmaps: (males − females)/females.
  • fig. S6. Fraction of cooperative actions separated by round number: for the first 1 to 3 rounds, 4 to 10 rounds, and last 11 to 18 rounds.
  • fig. S7. Relative difference in the fraction of cooperation heatmaps between groups of rounds.
  • fig. S8. Total number of actions in each point of the (T,S) plane for all 541 participants in the experiment (the total number of game actions in the experiment adds up to 8366).
  • fig. S9. SEM fraction of cooperative actions in each point of the (T,S) plane for all the participants in the experiment.
  • fig. S10. Average fraction of cooperative actions (and SEM) among the population as a function of the round number overall (left) and separating the actions by game (right).
  • fig. S11. Distribution of fraction of rational actions among the 541 subjects of our experiment, when considering only their actions in HG or PD, or both.
  • fig. S12. Fraction of rational actions as a function of the round number for the 541 subjects, defined by their actions in the PD game and HG together (top) and independently (bottom).
  • fig. S13. Values of risk aversion averaged over the subjects in each phenotype.
  • fig. S14. Average response times (and SEM) as a function of the round number for all the participants in the experiment and separating the actions into cooperation or defection.
  • fig. S15. Distributions of response times for all the participants in the experiment and separating the actions into cooperation (top) and defection (bottom).
  • fig. S16. Testing the robustness of the results from the K-means algorithm.
  • fig. S17. Davies-Bouldin index as a function of the number of clusters in the partition of our data (dashed black) compared to the equivalent results for different leave-p-out analyses.
  • fig. S18. Average value for the normalized mutual information score, when doing pairwise comparisons of the clustering schemes from 2000 independent runs of the K-means algorithm both on the actual data and on the randomized version of the data.
  • fig. S19. Age distribution for the different phenotypes compared to the distribution of the whole population (black).
  • fig. S20. Difference between the experimental (second row) and numerical (or inferred; first row) behavioral heatmaps for each one of the phenotypes found by the K-means clustering algorithm, in units of SD.
  • fig. S21. Average level of cooperation over all game actions and for different values of T (in different colors).
  • fig. S22. Average level of cooperation as a function of (T,S) for both hypothesis and experiment.

Download PDF

Files in this Data Supplement: