Is hostile behavior intuitive or deliberative? A Hawk-Dove experiment with a varying harshness of conflict

Using a one-shot Hawk–Dove game, we experimentally investigate the effect of different cognitive modes—intuitive (induced by Time Pressure), deliberative (by Time Delay), and motivated deliberative (by Time Delay combined with a written motivation)—on the propensity to behave hostilely (i.e., to play Hawk). We also examine whether cognitive modes affect responsiveness to payoff incentives by varying the harshness of conflict. Our results show that intuition significantly increases the likelihood of hostile behavior, while motivated deliberation reduces it. The harshness of conflict does not significantly affect behavior, and we find no evidence that its effect differs across cognitive manipulations. However, when restricting attention to subjects in the pooled delay conditions, the effect of harshness becomes statistically significant, indicating that responsiveness to payoff incentives may require deliberation. Consistently, we find that deliberation increases the likelihood that subjects best respond to their own beliefs.