Citation map · Study

SZodixStudyAcademic Library

Shelves Open access

Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated

Sex differences in factors contributing to the level of cooperation in the Prisoner's Dilemma game.

1 references·16 citing·54 second hop

FromToDepth

this work references cited by second hop

References

1958Trust and suspicion2,076 cited

Cited by

2020Consumer Behaviour during Crises: Preliminary Research on How Coronavirus Has Manifested Consumer Panic Buying, Herd Mentality, Changing Discretionary Spending and the Role of the Media in Influencing Behaviour414 cited
1998Gender and Negotiator Competitiveness: A Meta-analysis389 cited
1978Sex differences in influenceability.359 cited
2011Sex differences in cooperation: A meta-analytic review of social dilemmas.348 cited
1998The impact of inequality, gender, external assistance and social capital on local-level cooperation216 cited
2002Trust, Reciprocity, and Other-Regarding Preferences: Groups Vs. Individuals and Males Vs. Females170 cited
2008To be or not to be trusted: The influence of media richness on defection and deception162 cited
1999Gender differences in the laboratory: evidence from prisoner’s dilemma games155 cited
2017Cooperation in the Finitely Repeated Prisoner’s Dilemma*145 cited
1994Trust, social categories, and individuals: The case of gender132 cited
2010Gender differences in cooperation with group membership132 cited
1971Cooperation and optimal responding in the Prisoner's Dilemma game: Effects of sex and physical attractiveness.132 cited
1969Variables in experimental games: Toward a field theory.

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work

121 cited

1999Learning from the Children: Practical and Theoretical Reflections on Playing and Learning116 cited

2017Neural dynamics of two players when using nonverbal cues to gauge intentions to cooperate during the Prisoner's Dilemma Game109 cited

1976Sex differences in group communication: A review of relevant research107 cited