PyGAAMAS: Comments on responder's decisions in the ultimatum game

README.md

@@ -197,7 +197,6 @@ Oosterbeek, H., Sloof, R., & Van De Kuilen, G. (2004).
 *Cultural differences in ultimatum game experiments: Evidence from a meta-analysis*. Experimental Economics, 
 7, 171–188. [https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EXEC.0000026978.14316.74](https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EXEC.0000026978.14316.74)
 
-
 The figure below presents a violin plot illustrating the share of the total amount (\$100) 
 that the proposer allocates to themselves for each model. The share selected by strategies 
 generated by <tt>Llama3</tt>, <tt>Mistral-Small</tt>, and <tt>Qwen3</tt> aligns with the median 
@@ -214,15 +213,15 @@ can be considered irrational.
 
 Secondly, we analyze the behavior of LLMs when assuming the role of the responder, 
 focusing on whether their acceptance or rejection of offers reveals a human-like sensitivity to unfairness. 
-The meta-analysis by Oosterbeek et al. (2004) reports that human participants 
- reject 16% of offers, amounting to 40% of the total stake. This finding suggests that factors 
+The meta-analysis by Oosterbeek et al. (2004) reports that human participants  reject 16% of offers, 
+amounting to 40% of the total stake. This finding suggests that factors 
 beyond purely economic self-interest—such as fairness concerns or the desire to punish perceived 
 injustice—significantly influence decision-making.
 
 The figure below presents a violin plot illustrating the acceptance rate of the responder for each 
-model when offered \$40 out of \$100. While the median acceptance rate of responses generated by
-<tt>GPT-4.5</tt>, <tt>Llama3</tt>, <tt>Llama3.3</tt>, <tt>Mixtral:8x7B</tt>, <tt>Deepseek-R1:7B</tt>, 
-and <tt>Qwen3</tt> is 1.0, the median acceptance rate for <tt>Mistral-Small</tt> and <tt>Deepseek-R1</tt> is 0.0.
+model when offered \$40 out of \$100. While <tt>GPT-4.5</tt>, <tt>Llama3</tt>, <tt>Llama3.3</tt>, <tt>Mixtral:8x7B</tt>,
+<tt>Deepseek-R1:7B</tt>, and <tt>Qwen3</tt> exhibit a rational median acceptance rate of 1.0, 
+<tt>Mistral-Small</tt> and <tt>Deepseek-R1</tt> display an irrational median acceptance rate of 0.0.
 
 It is worth noting that these results are not necessarily compliant with the strategies generated by the models. 
 For instance, <tt>GPT-4.5</tt> accepts offers as low as 20%, interpreting them as minimally fair,