&quot;This means that the player in the dominate position behaved more fairly then they needed to&quot;<p>I&#x27;d be careful saying more than they &quot;needed&quot; to. If the dominant player had behaved only as fairly as the Nash prediction then human beings would not see that as fair. We all know this intuitively, and we know that other people know it, etc.<p>As I understand it, modeling human behaviour in regards to reciprocity and judgements of fairness with game theory isn&#x27;t particularly useful given that this is engaging our evolved behaviour as highly social animals.<p>It&#x27;s not my field so I could be completely wrong, but I am under the impression this is very well established.