Research ArticleSOCIAL SCIENCES

Integrating simultaneous prosocial and antisocial behavior into theories of collective action

See allHide authors and affiliations

Science Advances  04 Mar 2016:
Vol. 2, no. 3, e1501220
DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.1501220
  • Fig. 1 Study area showing location of MPAs, associated fishing communities, and control sites.
  • Fig. 2 Higher average cooperation and hypercompetition in MPA than in no-MPA sites.

    (A and B) The percentage of endowment used for cooperation and hypercompetition in no-MPA and MPA sites when the individual making a choice to cooperate and/or hypercompete is a fisher (A) and a nonfisher (B). Cooperation is defined as the percentage of endowment allocated to a group fund, and hypercompetition is defined as the percentage of endowment allocated to reduction of others’ payoff.

  • Fig. 3 A much higher proportion of hypercompetitive cooperators are found in MPA sites than in no-MPA sites.

    Percentage of hypercompetitive cooperators (also highlighted in yellow) are found in the upper right quadrant at no-MPA and MPA sites, and they are defined as those individuals allocating at least 50% of their endowment to the group fund and 50% of their endowment to reducing others’ payoff. “I am” refers to the participant making the choice depicted and “other is” refers to the participant the “I am” is paired with.

  • Fig. 4 Fishers’ self-reported responses on the experimental and nonexperimental MPAs in our study area.

    (A to C) Fishers’ self-reported responses (n = 544) on how MPAs have affected their fishing practices (A), catch (B), and their own capacity to work together to solve fishing problems (C). Experimental MPA sites are marked with an asterisk.

Supplementary Materials

  • Supplementary material for this article is available at http://advances.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2/3/e1501220/DC1

    Materials and Methods

    Additional results

    Table S1. Characteristics of our study site and our surveying effort.

    Table S2. Description of variables.

    Table S3. Mean differences (or frequencies) between MPA and non-MPA sites.

    Table S4. Cooperation to fishers.

    Table S5. Cooperation to nonfishers.

    Table S6. Hypercompetitiveness to fishers.

    Table S7. Hypercompetitiveness to nonfishers.

    Table S8. Hypercompetitive cooperator to fishers.

    Table S9. Robustness test: exclude high-stake sessions.

    Table S10. Robustness test: include all participants.

    Appendix 1. Experimental instructions.

    Appendix 2. Ex-post questionnaire.

    References (98107)

  • Supplementary Materials

    This PDF file includes:

    • Materials and Methods
    • Additional results
    • Table S1. Characteristics of our study site and our surveying effort.
    • Table S2. Description of variables.
    • Table S3. Mean differences (or frequencies) between MPA and non-MPA sites.
    • Table S4. Cooperation to fishers.
    • Table S5. Cooperation to nonfishers.
    • Table S6. Hypercompetitiveness to fishers.
    • Table S7. Hypercompetitiveness to nonfishers.
    • Table S8. Hypercompetitive cooperator to fishers.
    • Table S9. Robustness test: exclude high-stake sessions.
    • Table S10. Robustness test: include all participants.
    • Appendix 1. Experimental instructions.
    • Appendix 2. Ex-post questionnaire.
    • References (98–107)

    Download PDF

    Files in this Data Supplement:

Navigate This Article