The Incentive Effect On Public Cooperation By Different Forms Of Leading By Example

Purpose: We adopted different leader selection method to observe the incentive effect of leadingby example on public cooperation in random leader group, fixed leader group and rotary leadergroup. At the same time, by way of giving leader rewards and punishment power，we furtherobserved the lifting effect of leader’s power on leading by example and the value of promotingpublic cooperation.Methods: This study used repeated sequential public goods game as a basic experimentframework. The study was made up of two parts. Part one investigated the incentive effect ofdifferent leader selection forms on public cooperation It contained a total of four differenttreatments: group without leader, random leader group, fixed leader group, rotary leader group.We investigated and compared the cooperation level, profit and contribution behaviors of leaderand follower in these treatments respectively. Part two investigated the incentive effect of givingleader power on public cooperation. It contained a total of two different treatments: giving leaderrewards power group and giving leader punishment power group. We also investigated andcompared the cooperation level, profit, contribution behaviors of leader and follower，combinedwith the rewards behaviors and punishment behaviors of leader in these treatments respectively.Results:1.Under the background of repeated sequential public goods game. the cooperation level ofgroup with a leader was significantly more than the cooperation level of group without a leader.2.In every treatment with leader, the cooperation level of leader was significantly more than thecooperation level of follower, the profit of leader was significantly less than the average profit offollower.3.The cooperation level of treatment with leader from highest to lowest was: rotary leader group,random leader group, fixed leader group，but three different leader selection forms had nosignificant difference between each other.4.Giving leader rewards power and punishment power had significantly promoting effect for thepublic cooperation, the cooperation level of giving leader punishment power group was more than the cooperation level of giving leader rewards power group, the profit of giving leaderpunishment power group was a little less than the profit of giving leader rewards power group.5.The use frequency of rewards power and the amount of used rewards tokens were more thanthe use frequency of punishment power and the amount of used punishment tokens.Conclusion:1.Whether leading by example is short-term or long-term, it had an incentive effect on publiccooperation.2.No matter what kind of leader selection forms would have an incentive effect on publiccooperation, but rotary leader and random leader had a better effect than fixed leader. It wasnecessary to have a leader change within the group members.3.The guarantee of extrinsic incentive mechanism like strong reciprocity made the incentivemechanism of leading by example had a better incentive effect on public cooperation.4.Appropriate punishment can kept the public cooperation level steadily in a well state, excessiverewards was harmful for the public cooperation level.