TODO notes:
2x2 study of BoS vs PD crossed with chat or no-chat. All did 40 trials. All did a 3 minute “turing-test” free chat at the start. Run Jan 7. Target was 20 pairs in each condition.
According to https://osf.io/8fnze, the analyses I’m going to do:
This is exploratory research, here are some things we plan to explore. role of language on score. For each type of game, do games with language have higher overall scores ? Is this related to if language was actually used? Quantity and type of language over rounds. How much language is produced each round in PD v BoS? Does it decline in later rounds? What type of language is used? Is it just identifying what to select or is there meta-strategy/negotiation? Are pairs converging to predictable strategies?
Estimated 15 mins total including intro/exit/waiting turing etc
How long did people spend playing? (Not counting intro chat round)
## # A tibble: 4 x 3
## # Groups: game_cond [2]
## game_cond chat_cond n
## <chr> <chr> <int>
## 1 BoS chat 19
## 2 BoS nochat 16
## 3 PD chat 17
## 4 PD nochat 17
A respectable rate of game completion.
Note that bonuses are not directly comparable between BoS & PD! But it looks like chat helps in BoS and not (much?) in PD.
People talked some. I haven’t looked at the transcripts at all.
This chat is raw. There are outliers that have been chopped off. People talk more during BoS than PD.
Currently open questions – is that game-related chat, or is it just that it’s a friendlier game? Does the chatting help?
## # A tibble: 1 x 1
## s
## <int>
## 1 2093
Most utterances are single word utterances, we’ll consider these and multi word utterances separately.
## WORD FREQ
## 1 green 90
## 2 ok 84
## 3 blue 83
## 4 pink 56
## 5 purple 45
## 6 red 38
## 7 yellow 35
## 8 orange 26
## 9 brown 24
## 10 g 22
## 11 grey 18
## 12 okay 16
## 13 u 15
## 14 b 12
## 15 y 11
## 16 I 9
## 17 p 9
## 18 r 9
## 19 white 9
## 20 yeah 8
## [1] 433
There are 743 singletons. Of these 100 are ok/okay, at least 433 are color words, more once you count rarities and misspellings. There’s also a bunch of singleton letters – these seem to be single letter color abbreviations?
From skimming transcripts, looks like multi’s occur earlier in general. But we’re confounded by pleasantries at random times (talking about where they live, etc).
game_cond | repNum | text |
---|---|---|
BoS | 0 | are we splitting or out to make money |
BoS | 0 | id like ot be fair |
BoS | 0 | trying to figure out how to do that tho |
BoS | 0 | i think we need a few rounds to figure it out |
BoS | 0 | there must be some rules |
BoS | 0 | ok green together |
BoS | 2 | i pink you blue |
BoS | 2 | or wait |
BoS | 3 | ok just go by the chart |
BoS | 3 | we need to select the same |
BoS | 4 | you can have it take yellow |
BoS | 4 | yellow ill give the next to you |
BoS | 6 | take it |
BoS | 7 | awesome team work |
BoS | 7 | hell yeaah |
BoS | 7 | left one |
BoS | 7 | the purplish |
BoS | 11 | awesome d |
BoS | 16 | i think its different for us |
BoS | 16 | the positions of the colors |
BoS | 16 | the green |
BoS | 23 | i love the teamwork |
BoS | 23 | hahaah yess |
BoS | 23 | where are you from |
BoS | 23 | im curious |
BoS | 23 | germany and you |
BoS | 23 | ich bin von polen |
BoS | 23 | noice d |
BoS | 23 | lets go green |
BoS | 35 | go pink |
BoS | 39 | oh woow last round |
BoS | 39 | you can have it |
BoS | 5 | one for me one for you |
BoS | 5 | i was going one left one right |
BoS | 5 | do blue |
BoS | 8 | blue one xd |
BoS | 8 | the other |
BoS | 9 | one for me now |
BoS | 9 | now the blue one |
BoS | 10 | now pink |
To look at if chatting helps – we can compare forced no-chat to chat (see bonuses above). We can also compare used chat (0/1 or amount) within those that could chat.
Options for dependent variable are bonus (although there’s some noise there) or option chosen.
Looks like chatting helps for BoS, doesn’t get used much for PD.
In BoS: P1 prefers AA to BB, P2 prefers BB to AA. AB and BA are bad for both.
In PD: P1 prefers BA > AA > BB > AB and P2 prefers AB > AA > BB > BA. (BB is Nash equilibrium, AA is Pareto dominant.)
Not really sure how to visualize this efficiently?
Being in the chat condition v not
Actually using the chat that round
## # A tibble: 4 x 4
## # Groups: game_cond, chat_cond [4]
## game_cond chat_cond no yes
## <chr> <chr> <int> <int>
## 1 BoS chat 4 34
## 2 BoS nochat 6 26
## 3 PD chat 5 29
## 4 PD nochat 4 30
Only 10-20% of players think the other person is a bot!