IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v7y2017i4p2158244017737592.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Grounded Agent-Based Model of Common Good Production in a Residential Complex: Applying Artificial Experiments

Author

Listed:
  • Ahmadreza Asgharpourmasouleh
  • Atiye Sadeghi
  • Ali Yousofi

Abstract

The present research addressed the problem of common good production referring to a real-world problem in an urban residential complex in Mashhad city, Iran. The residential complex includes four blocks showing different rates of success in the common good production. Analyzing the qualitative field data, using grounded theory framework, we distinguished seven different strategies among residents: vandal, robber, cheater, abider, cooperator, compensator, and punisher. The other main agents’ property that seems to be determining in the production of common good is their desirability for them which we quantified it referring to a couple of personal variables. The outputs of the qualitative phase of research let us to design an agent-based model in computer to apply some artificial experiments and find ways for promoting the situation. The results showed that some specific minor changes in agent combinations can make a great difference in the outcomes and solve the complex of cooperation.

Suggested Citation

  • Ahmadreza Asgharpourmasouleh & Atiye Sadeghi & Ali Yousofi, 2017. "A Grounded Agent-Based Model of Common Good Production in a Residential Complex: Applying Artificial Experiments," SAGE Open, , vol. 7(4), pages 21582440177, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:7:y:2017:i:4:p:2158244017737592
    DOI: 10.1177/2158244017737592
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244017737592
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2158244017737592?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simon Gachter & Ernst Fehr, 2000. "Cooperation and Punishment in Public Goods Experiments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(4), pages 980-994, September.
    2. Gintis, Herbert, 2004. "Modeling cooperation among self-interested agents: a critique," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 695-714, December.
    3. Hauk, Esther, 2001. "Leaving the Prison: Permitting Partner Choice and Refusal in Prisoner's Dilemma Games," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 18(1), pages 65-87, August.
    4. Jillian J Jordan & David G Rand & Samuel Arbesman & James H Fowler & Nicholas A Christakis, 2013. "Contagion of Cooperation in Static and Fluid Social Networks," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(6), pages 1-10, June.
    5. Cinyabuguma, Matthias & Page, Talbot & Putterman, Louis, 2005. "Cooperation under the threat of expulsion in a public goods experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(8), pages 1421-1435, August.
    6. David Masclet, 2003. "Ostracism in Work Teams: A Public Good Experiment," Post-Print halshs-00144851, HAL.
    7. Ernst Fehr & Simon Gächter, 2002. "Altruistic punishment in humans," Nature, Nature, vol. 415(6868), pages 137-140, January.
    8. Lu Yang & Nigel Gilbert, 2008. "Getting Away From Numbers: Using Qualitative Observation For Agent-Based Modeling," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 11(02), pages 175-185.
    9. Yen-Sheng Chiang, 2013. "Cooperation Could Evolve in Complex Networks when Activated Conditionally on Network Characteristics," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 16(2), pages 1-6.
    10. Mike Farjam & Marco Faillo & Ida Sprinkhuizen-Kuyper & Pim Haselager, 2015. "Punishment Mechanisms and Their Effect on Cooperation: A Simulation Study," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 18(1), pages 1-5.
    11. Ozge Dilaver, 2015. "From Participants to Agents: Grounded Simulation as a Mixed-Method Research Design," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 18(1), pages 1-15.
    12. Hang Ye & Fei Tan & Mei Ding & Yongmin Jia & Yefeng Chen, 2011. "Sympathy and Punishment: Evolution of Cooperation in Public Goods Game," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 14(4), pages 1-20.
    13. Amineh Ghorbani & Gerard Dijkema & Noortje Schrauwen, 2015. "Structuring Qualitative Data for Agent-Based Modelling," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 18(1), pages 1-2.
    14. Hai-hua Hu & Jun Lin & Wen-tian Cui, 2015. "Intervention Strategies and the Diffusion of Collective Behavior," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 18(3), pages 1-16.
    15. Ernst Fehr & Urs Fischbacher, 2003. "The nature of human altruism," Nature, Nature, vol. 425(6960), pages 785-791, October.
    16. Alistair Sutcliffe & Di Wang, 2012. "Computational Modelling of Trust and Social Relationships," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 15(1), pages 1-3.
    17. Martin A. Nowak & Karl Sigmund, 2005. "Evolution of indirect reciprocity," Nature, Nature, vol. 437(7063), pages 1291-1298, October.
    18. Grimm, Volker & Berger, Uta & DeAngelis, Donald L. & Polhill, J. Gary & Giske, Jarl & Railsback, Steven F., 2010. "The ODD protocol: A review and first update," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 221(23), pages 2760-2768.
    19. David A. Siegel, 2009. "Social Networks and Collective Action," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(1), pages 122-138, January.
    20. Duncan J. Watts & Peter Sheridan Dodds, 2007. "Influentials, Networks, and Public Opinion Formation," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 34(4), pages 441-458, May.
    21. Ronald S. Burt & Marc Knez, 1995. "Kinds of Third-Party Effects on Trust," Rationality and Society, , vol. 7(3), pages 255-292, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alexandra Baier & Loukas Balafoutas & Tarek Jaber-Lopez, 2023. "Ostracism and theft in heterogeneous groups," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 26(1), pages 193-222, March.
    2. Nichola Raihani & David Aitken, 2011. "Uncertainty, rationality and cooperation in the context of climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 108(1), pages 47-55, September.
    3. Simon Gaechter & Benedikt Herrmann, 2008. "Reciprocity, culture, and human cooperation: Previous insights and a new cross-cultural experiment," Discussion Papers 2008-14, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    4. Yu, Tongkui & Chen, Shu-Heng & Li, Honggang, 2011. "Social Norm, Costly Punishment and the Evolution to Cooperation," MPRA Paper 28814, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Wang, Xianjia & Ding, Rui & Zhao, Jinhua & Chen, Wenman & Gu, Cuiling, 2022. "Competition of punishment and reward among inequity-averse individuals in spatial public goods games," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    6. Johnson, Dominic D.P. & Price, Michael E. & Van Vugt, Mark, 2013. "Darwin's invisible hand: Market competition, evolution and the firm," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 90(S), pages 128-140.
    7. Shade T. Shutters, 2009. "Strong reciprocity, social structure, and the evolution of fair allocations in a simulated ultimatum game," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 64-77, June.
    8. Simon Gaechter & Benedikt Herrmann, 2008. "Reciprocity, culture, and human cooperation: Previous insights and a new cross-cultural experiment," Discussion Papers 2008-14, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    9. Cinyabuguma, Matthias & Page, Talbot & Putterman, Louis, 2005. "Cooperation under the threat of expulsion in a public goods experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(8), pages 1421-1435, August.
    10. Giangiacomo Bravo & Flaminio Squazzoni, 2013. "Exit, Punishment and Rewards in Commons Dilemmas: An Experimental Study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(8), pages 1-9, August.
    11. Tim Johnson & Christopher T. Dawes & James H. Fowler & Oleg Smirnov, 2020. "Slowing COVID-19 transmission as a social dilemma: Lessons for government officials from interdisciplinary research on cooperation," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 3(1).
    12. Mengyuan Zhou, 2022. "Does the Source of Inheritance Matter in Bequest Attitudes? Evidence from Japan," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 867-887, December.
    13. Mengyuan Zhou, 2019. "The Effect of the Source of Inheritance on Bequest Attitudes: Evidence from Japan," Keio-IES Discussion Paper Series 2019-018, Institute for Economics Studies, Keio University.
    14. Almeida, Sergio, 2023. "Punishment credibility and cooperation in public good games," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    15. de Melo, Gioia & Piaggio, Matías, 2015. "The perils of peer punishment: Evidence from a common pool resource framed field experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 376-393.
    16. Rockenbach, Bettina & Wolff, Irenaeus, 2009. "Institution design in social dilemmas: How to design if you must?," MPRA Paper 16922, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Gächter, Simon & Herrmann, Benedikt, 2011. "The limits of self-governance when cooperators get punished: Experimental evidence from urban and rural Russia," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 193-210, February.
    18. Vyrastekova, Jana & Funaki, Yukihiko, 2018. "Cooperation in a sequential dilemma game: How much transparency is good for cooperation?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 88-95.
    19. Dirk Engelmann & Nikos Nikiforakis, 2015. "In the long-run we are all dead: on the benefits of peer punishment in rich environments," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 45(3), pages 561-577, October.
    20. Tünde Paál & Tamás Bereczkei, 2015. "Punishment as a Means of Competition: Implications for Strong Reciprocity Theory," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(3), pages 1-14, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:7:y:2017:i:4:p:2158244017737592. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.