Collective emotions in online AM152 web communities, yielding results resembling actually observed behavior. Fig 1 shows how different emotions may be classified according to this model.2.2 Utility functionIn the preceding subsection, we have summarized the two main building blocks of our model. We now move on to its definition by considering the requirements that an utility function Dalfopristin chemical information should satisfy in order to account for the experimental results, from the viewpoint that the decision making process might be driven by a combination of both emotional and cognitive processes. Therefore, we would like to introduce a model that includes the next facts: 1. Emotions are triggered when offers differ from the perceived average (System 1). 2. The decision making process is a combination of cognitive (System 2) and emotional (System 1) impulses. 3. If a negative emotion (as represented by its valence) is triggered then players are willing to give money away in order to compensate for that emotion (as quantified by its arousal).PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0158733 July 6,5 /Emotions and Strategic Behaviour: The Case of the Ultimatum GameFig 1. Graphical representation of the circumplex model of emotions. The vertical axis corresponds to the arousal dimension and the horizontal one to the valence. Each point on the plane represents an emotional state. Sources: [27] [29]. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0158733.g4. Explanatory mechanisms must be compatible with the four ways suggested by Kahneman in which a judgement or choice may be made. For the sake of simplicity, let us assume that the total amount to be split is equal to one, and let xi and xj be the proportions of that amount corresponding to each player (xi + xj = 1). Our proposal for player i’s utility for an allocation x = xi, xj is given by ui ??xi ? i ; li ; ti ???with i ; li ; ti ??v ??a i ; li ; ti ???PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0158733 July 6,6 /Emotions and Strategic Behaviour: The Case of the Ultimatum Gamewhere8 > ? > > < 1 ?0 v ??sign xi ?> 2 > > :if if if (xi < 1=2 xi ?1=2 xi > 1=2 0 li if if j2xi ?1j < ti j2xi ?1j > ti=a i ; li ; ti ??li Y 2xi ?1j ?ti ?and 0 < li < 1;= =0 < ti <= =Let us now discuss in detail the ingredients of our model. To begin with, the function (xi; , ) represents how an emotion, triggered by the allocation x, influences the perceived utility of a player. It can be separated in the product of two quantities; the valence, v(x), and the arousal, a(x; , ). In agreement with the previously seen Circumplex Model, the former determines whether the emotion is perceived as either positive or negative, and the latter gives account of its intensity in a scale determined by the total amount to be split. Furthermore, the emotion is negative if the amount to consider is less than that of an equal split, and viceversa. The reason behind this choice is that, as we already mentioned, the "average" (the even split in this case) is cognitively easy to evaluate according to Kahneman's findings [25] [26], and so we take deviations from this pre-stablished value as the baseline to test in which direction may the emotion triggered influence the perceived utility. On the other hand, the arousal a(x; , ) is formulated in terms of a Heaviside function that captures the idea of how this biased thinking may ultimately affect the decision or not. As we have defined it, it implies that deviations from the average must be greater than a parameter (characteristic of each individual).Collective emotions in online communities, yielding results resembling actually observed behavior. Fig 1 shows how different emotions may be classified according to this model.2.2 Utility functionIn the preceding subsection, we have summarized the two main building blocks of our model. We now move on to its definition by considering the requirements that an utility function should satisfy in order to account for the experimental results, from the viewpoint that the decision making process might be driven by a combination of both emotional and cognitive processes. Therefore, we would like to introduce a model that includes the next facts: 1. Emotions are triggered when offers differ from the perceived average (System 1). 2. The decision making process is a combination of cognitive (System 2) and emotional (System 1) impulses. 3. If a negative emotion (as represented by its valence) is triggered then players are willing to give money away in order to compensate for that emotion (as quantified by its arousal).PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0158733 July 6,5 /Emotions and Strategic Behaviour: The Case of the Ultimatum GameFig 1. Graphical representation of the circumplex model of emotions. The vertical axis corresponds to the arousal dimension and the horizontal one to the valence. Each point on the plane represents an emotional state. Sources: [27] [29]. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0158733.g4. Explanatory mechanisms must be compatible with the four ways suggested by Kahneman in which a judgement or choice may be made. For the sake of simplicity, let us assume that the total amount to be split is equal to one, and let xi and xj be the proportions of that amount corresponding to each player (xi + xj = 1). Our proposal for player i's utility for an allocation x = xi, xj is given by ui ??xi ? i ; li ; ti ???with i ; li ; ti ??v ??a i ; li ; ti ???PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0158733 July 6,6 /Emotions and Strategic Behaviour: The Case of the Ultimatum Gamewhere8 > ? > > < 1 ?0 v ??sign xi ?> 2 > > :if if if (xi < 1=2 xi ?1=2 xi > 1=2 0 li if if j2xi ?1j < ti j2xi ?1j > ti=a i ; li ; ti ??li Y 2xi ?1j ?ti ?and 0 < li < 1;= =0 < ti <= =Let us now discuss in detail the ingredients of our model. To begin with, the function (xi; , ) represents how an emotion, triggered by the allocation x, influences the perceived utility of a player. It can be separated in the product of two quantities; the valence, v(x), and the arousal, a(x; , ). In agreement with the previously seen Circumplex Model, the former determines whether the emotion is perceived as either positive or negative, and the latter gives account of its intensity in a scale determined by the total amount to be split. Furthermore, the emotion is negative if the amount to consider is less than that of an equal split, and viceversa. The reason behind this choice is that, as we already mentioned, the "average" (the even split in this case) is cognitively easy to evaluate according to Kahneman's findings [25] [26], and so we take deviations from this pre-stablished value as the baseline to test in which direction may the emotion triggered influence the perceived utility. On the other hand, the arousal a(x; , ) is formulated in terms of a Heaviside function that captures the idea of how this biased thinking may ultimately affect the decision or not. As we have defined it, it implies that deviations from the average must be greater than a parameter (characteristic of each individual).