How do we use language to coordinate with each other? This question is of interest both from the cognitive science of language perspective as well as the game theory perspective. Here we attempt to bridge the gap between the empirical tradition of studying language use for coordination in reference games with the theoretical and analytic framework of game theory. We conducted a series of 5 real-time online experiments where pairs of participants were matched to play a sequence of 40 2x2 games together (total N=616). Across the experiments, we varied the exact structure of trials, but all experiments involved trials with reward structures modeled on Prisoner’s Dilemma (PD) and Bach or Stravinsky (BoS). We manipulated the presence or absence of a chat interface as a between-pairs manipulation. Despite low levels of use of the communication channel, we found slight differences in outcome between the chat and nochat groups, where pairs who could communicate were slightly more likely to reach coordinated beneficial outcomes in BoS games. In contrast to the predictions of rational actors, participants in both chat and no-chat conditions generally aligned on both cooperating rather than both defecting in PD. Overall, we were limited in our ability to discern the role of communication channels in game strategies due to low uptake in using the communication channels when available.
Boyce et al. (Wed,) studied this question.