How do people decide which action to take? This question is best answered using Game Theory, which has proposed a series of decision-making mechanisms that people potentially use. In network simulations, wherein games are repeated and pay-off differences can be observed, those mechanisms often rely on imitation of successful behaviour. Surprisingly, little to no evidence has been provided about whether people actually imitate more successful opponents when altering their actions in that context. By comparing two experimental treatments wherein participants play the iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma game in a lattice, we aim to answer whether more successful actions are imitated. While in the first treatment, participants have the possibility to use pay-off differences in making their decision, the second treatment hinders such imitation as no information about the gains is provided. If imitation of the more successful plays a role then there should be a difference in how players switch from cooperation to defection between both treatments. Although, cooperation and pay-off levels do not appear to be significantly different between both treatments, detailed analysis shows that there are behavioural differences: when confronted with a more successful co-player, the focal player will imitate her behaviour as the switching is related to the experienced pay-off inequality.

人们如何决定采取哪种行动？这个问题最好用博弈论来回答，它提出了人们可能使用的一系列决策机制。在重复进行游戏并观察到收益差异的网络模拟中，这些机制通常依赖于成功行为的模仿。令人惊讶的是，几乎没有甚至没有证据表明人们在这种情况下改变自己的行为时是否真的模仿了更成功的对手。通过比较参与者以格子形式进行迭代的囚徒困境游戏的两种实验方法，我们旨在回答是否模仿了更多成功的行为。在第一次治疗中，参与者可以利用收益差异来做出决定，第二种处理阻碍了这种模仿，因为没有提供有关收益的信息。如果模仿更成功的角色起着作用，那么玩家在两种治疗方法之间如何从合作转变为叛逃应该有区别。尽管两种治疗之间的合作和回报水平似乎没有显着差异，但详细的分析显示仍存在行为差异：当面对更成功的共同玩家时，焦点玩家会模仿与切换相关的行为经验丰富的回报不平等。