Evolutionary game theory meets social science: Is there a unifying rule for human cooperation?

Evolutionary game theory has shown that human cooperation thrives in different types of social interactions with a PD structure. Models treat the cooperative strategies within the different frameworks as discrete entities and sometimes even as contenders. Whereas strong reciprocity was acclaimed as superior to classic reciprocity for its ability to defeat defectors in public goods games, recent experiments and simulations show that costly punishment fails to promote cooperation in the IR and DR games, where classic reciprocity succeeds. My aim is to show that cooperative strategies across frameworks are capable of a unified treatment, for they are governed by a common underlying rule or norm. An analysis of the reputation and action rules that govern some representative cooperative strategies both in models and in economic experiments confirms that the different frameworks share a conditional action rule and several reputation rules. The common conditional rule contains an option between costly punishment and withholding benefits that provides alternative enforcement methods against defectors. Depending on the framework, individuals can switch to the appropriate strategy and method of enforcement. The stability of human cooperation looks more promising if one mechanism controls successful strategies across frameworks.     

Reactive strategies in indirect reciprocity

Evolution of reactive strategy of indirect reciprocity is discussed, where individuals interact with others through the one-shot Prisoner's Dilemma game, changing their partners in every round. We investigate all of the reactive strategies that are stochastic, including deterministic ones as special cases. First we study adaptive dynamics of reactive strategies by assuming monomorphic population. Results are very similar to the corresponding evolutionary dynamics of direct reciprocity. The discriminating strategy, which prescribes cooperation only with those who cooperated in the previous round, cannot be an outcome of the evolution. Next we examine the case where the population includes a diversity of strategies. We find that only the mean 'discriminatoriness' in the population is the parameter that affects the evolutionary dynamics. The discriminating strategy works as a promoter of cooperation there. However, it is again not the end point of the evolution. This is because retaliatory defection, which was prescribed by the discriminating strategy, is regarded as another defection toward the society. These results caution that we have to reconsider the role of retaliatory defection much more carefully.     

Indirect reciprocity under incomplete observation

Indirect reciprocity, in which individuals help others with a good reputation but not those with a bad reputation, is a mechanism for cooperation in social dilemma situations when individuals do not repeatedly interact with the same partners. In a relatively large society where indirect reciprocity is relevant, individuals may not know each other's reputation even indirectly. Previous studies investigated the situations where individuals playing the game have to determine the action possibly without knowing others' reputations. Nevertheless, the possibility that observers of the game, who generate the reputation of the interacting players, assign reputations without complete information about them has been neglected. Because an individual acts as an interacting player and as an observer on different occasions if indirect reciprocity is endogenously sustained in a society, the incompleteness of information may affect either role. We examine the game of indirect reciprocity when the reputations of players are not necessarily known to observers and to interacting players. We find that the trustful discriminator, which cooperates with good and unknown players and defects against bad players, realizes cooperative societies under seven social norms. Among the seven social norms, three of the four suspicious norms under which cooperation (defection) to unknown players leads to a good (bad) reputation enable cooperation down to a relatively small observation probability. In contrast, the three trustful norms under which both cooperation and defection to unknown players lead to a good reputation are relatively efficient.     

Punishing free riders: direct and indirect promotion of cooperation

Human cooperation in a large group of genetically unrelated people is an evolutionary puzzle. Despite its costly nature, cooperative behavior is commonly found in all human societies—a fact that has interested researchers from a wide range of disciplines, including biology, economics, and psychology, to name a few. Many behavioral experiments have demonstrated that cooperation within a group can be sustained when free riders are punished. We argue that punishment has both a direct effect and an indirect effect on promoting cooperation. The direct effect of punishment alters the consequences of cooperation and defection in such a way as to make a rational person prefer cooperation. The indirect effect of punishment promotes cooperation among conditional cooperators by providing the condition necessary for their cooperation (i.e., the expectation that other members will also cooperate). Here we present data from two one-shot n-person prisoner's dilemma games, demonstrating that the indirect effect of punishment complements the direct effect to increase cooperation in the game. Furthermore, we show that direct and indirect effects are robust across two forms of punishment technology: either when punishment is voluntarily provided by game players themselves or when it is exogenously provided by the experimenter.     

Contingent movement and cooperation evolve under generalized reciprocity

How cooperation and altruism among non-relatives can persist in the face of cheating remains a key puzzle in evolutionary biology. Although mechanisms such as direct and indirect reciprocity and limited movement have been put forward to explain such cooperation, they cannot explain cooperation among unfamiliar, highly mobile individuals. Here we show that cooperation may be evolutionarily stable if decisions taken to cooperate and to change group membership are both dependent on anonymous social experience (generalized reciprocity). We find that a win-stay, lose-shift rule (where shifting is either moving away from the group or changing tactics within the group after receiving defection) evolves in evolutionary simulations when group leaving is moderately costly (i.e. the current payoff to being alone is low, but still higher than that in a mutually defecting group, and new groups are rarely encountered). This leads to the establishment of widespread cooperation in the population. If the costs of group leaving are reduced, a similar group-leaving rule evolves in association with cooperation in pairs and exploitation of larger anonymous groups. We emphasize that mechanisms of assortment within populations are often behavioural decisions and should not be considered independently of the evolution of cooperation.     

Evolution of All-or-None Strategies in Repeated Public Goods Dilemmas

Many problems of cooperation involve repeated interactions among the same groups of individuals. When collective action is at stake, groups often engage in Public Goods Games (PGG), where individuals contribute (or not) to a common pool, subsequently sharing the resources. Such scenarios of repeated group interactions materialize situations in which direct reciprocation to groups may be at work. Here we study direct group reciprocity considering the complete set of reactive strategies, where individuals behave conditionally on what they observed in the previous round. We study both analytically and by computer simulations the evolutionary dynamics encompassing this extensive strategy space, witnessing the emergence of a surprisingly simple strategy that we call All-Or-None (AoN). AoN consists in cooperating only after a round of unanimous group behavior (cooperation or defection), and proves robust in the presence of errors, thus fostering cooperation in a wide range of group sizes. The principles encapsulated in this strategy share a level of complexity reminiscent of that found already in 2-person games under direct and indirect reciprocity, reducing, in fact, to the well-known Win-Stay-Lose-Shift strategy in the limit of the repeated 2-person Prisoner''s Dilemma.     

Dynamics to Equilibrium in Network Games: Individual Behavior and Global Response

Various social contexts can be depicted as games of strategic interactions on networks, where an individual’s welfare depends on both her and her partners’ actions. Whereas much attention has been devoted to Bayes-Nash equilibria in such games, here we look at strategic interactions from an evolutionary perspective. To this end, we present the results of a numerical simulations program for these games, which allows us to find out whether Nash equilibria are accessible by adaptation of player strategies, and in general to identify the attractors of the evolution. Simulations allow us to go beyond a global characterization of the cooperativeness at equilibrium and probe into individual behavior. We find that when players imitate each other, evolution does not reach Nash equilibria and, worse, leads to very unfavorable states in terms of welfare. On the contrary, when players update their behavior rationally, they self-organize into a rich variety of Nash equilibria, where individual behavior and payoffs are shaped by the nature of the game, the social network’s structure and the players’ position within the network. Our results allow to assess the validity of mean-field approaches we use to describe the dynamics of these games. Interestingly, our dynamically-found equilibria generally do not coincide with (but show qualitatively the same features of) those resulting from theoretical predictions in the context of one-shot games under incomplete information.     

Asymmetric interaction will facilitate the evolution of cooperation

Explaining the evolution of cooperation remains one of the greatest problems for both biology and social science. The classical theories of cooperation suggest that cooperation equilibrium or evolutionary stable strategy between partners can be maintained through genetic similarity or reciprocity relatedness. These classical theories are based on an assumption that partners interact symmetrically with equal payoffs in a game of cooperation interaction. However, the payoff between partners is usually not equal and therefore they often interact asymmetrically in real cooperative systems. With the Hawk-Dove model, we find that the probability of cooperation between cooperative partners will depend closely on the payoff ratio. The higher the payoff ratio between recipients and cooperative actors, the greater will be the probability of cooperation interaction between involved partners. The greatest probability of conflict between cooperative partners will occur when the payoff between partners is equal. The results show that this asymmetric relationship is one of the key dynamics of the evolution of cooperation, and that pure cooperation strategy (i.e., Nash equilibrium) does not exist in asymmetrical cooperation systems, which well explains the direct conflict observed in almost all of the well documented cooperation systems. The model developed here shows that the cost-to-benefit ratio of cooperation is also negatively correlated with the probability of cooperation interaction. A smaller cost-to-benefit ratio of cooperation might be created by the limited dispersal ability or exit cost of the partners involved, and it will make the punishment of the non-cooperative individuals by the recipient more credible, and therefore make it more possible to maintain stable cooperation interaction.     

The continuous Prisoner's dilemma: II. Linear reactive strategies with noise.

We present a general model for the Continuous Prisoner's Dilemma and study the effect of errors. We find that cooperative strategies that can resist invasion by defectors are optimistic (make high initial offers), generous (always offer more cooperation than the partner did in the previous round) and uncompromising (offer full cooperation only if the partner does). A necessary condition for the emergence of cooperation in the continuous Prisoner's Dilemma with noise is b (1-p)>c, where b and c denote, respectively, the benefit and cost of cooperation, while p is the error rate. This relation can be reformulated as an error threshold: cooperation can only emerge if the probability of making a mistake is below a critical value. We note, however, that cooperation in the continuous Prisoner's Dilemma with noise does not seem to be evolutionarily stable: while it is possible to find cooperative strategies that resist invasion by defectors, such cooperators are generally invaded by more cooperative strategies which eventually yield to defectors. Thus, the long-term evolution of the continuous Prisoner's Dilemma is either characterized by unending cycles or by stable polymorphisms of cooperators and defectors.     

The evolution of punishment and apology: an iterated prisoner's dilemma model

Recently, behaviors that seem to function as punishment or apology have been reported among non-human primates as well as humans. Such behaviors appear to play an important role in maintaining cooperation between individuals. Therefore, the evolution of these behaviors should be examined from the viewpoint of the evolution of cooperation. The iterated prisoner's dilemma (IPD) game is generally considered to be a standard model for the evolution of cooperation. In the present study, strategies accompanied by punishment-like attacks or apology-like behavior were introduced into the common IPD simulation. Punishment and apology were represented by the P signal and the AS signal given immediately after defection. A strategy with the P and AS signals, named the pPAS strategy, was proved to be an evolutionarily stable strategy under certain conditions. Numerical simulations were carried out according to different assigned values of the costs of punishment and apology. The simulations showed that pPAS could dominate the population (1) when the cost of giving P is relatively small, (2) when the cost of receiving P is relatively large, or (3) when the cost of giving AS is relatively large. The relative cost of giving AS had the clearest effect on the success of pPAS. pPAS can dominate the population even when a dominance asymmetry of the costs between two players was introduced. The present results suggest the possible evolution of social behaviors like punishment or apology as a means of maintaining cooperation. This revised version was published online in November 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Can Centralized Sanctioning Promote Trust in Social Dilemmas? A Two-Level Trust Game with Incomplete Information

The problem of trust is a paradigmatic social dilemma. Previous literature has paid much academic attention on effects of peer punishment and altruistic third-party punishment on trust and human cooperation in dyadic interactions. However, the effects of centralized sanctioning institutions on decentralized reciprocity in hierarchical interactions remain to be further explored. This paper presents a formal two-level trust game with incomplete information which adds an authority as a strategic purposive actor into the traditional trust game. This model allows scholars to examine the problem of trust in more complex game theoretic configurations. The analysis demonstrates how the centralized institutions might change the dynamics of reciprocity between the trustor and the trustee. Findings suggest that the sequential equilibria of the newly proposed two-level model simultaneously include the risk of placing trust for the trustor and the temptation of short-term defection for the trustee. Moreover, they have shown that even a slight uncertainty about the type of the newly introduced authority might facilitate the establishment of trust and reciprocity in social dilemmas.     

Resolving the iterated prisoner's dilemma: theory and reality

Pairs of unrelated individuals face a prisoner's dilemma if cooperation is the best mutual outcome, but each player does best to defect regardless of his partner's behaviour. Although mutual defection is the only evolutionarily stable strategy in one-shot games, cooperative solutions based on reciprocity can emerge in iterated games. Among the most prominent theoretical solutions are the so-called bookkeeping strategies, such as tit-for-tat, where individuals copy their partner's behaviour in the previous round. However, the lack of empirical data conforming to predicted strategies has prompted the suggestion that the iterated prisoner's dilemma (IPD) is neither a useful nor realistic basis for investigating cooperation. Here, we discuss several recent studies where authors have used the IPD framework to interpret their data. We evaluate the validity of their approach and highlight the diversity of proposed solutions. Strategies based on precise accounting are relatively uncommon, perhaps because the full set of assumptions of the IPD model are rarely satisfied. Instead, animals use a diverse array of strategies that apparently promote cooperation, despite the temptation to cheat. These include both positive and negative reciprocity, as well as long-term mutual investments based on 'friendships'. Although there are various gaps in these studies that remain to be filled, we argue that in most cases, individuals could theoretically benefit from cheating and that cooperation cannot therefore be explained with the concept of positive pseudo-reciprocity. We suggest that by incorporating empirical data into the theoretical framework, we may gain fundamental new insights into the evolution of mutual reciprocal investment in nature.     

Clustering in large networks does not promote upstream reciprocity

Upstream reciprocity (also called generalized reciprocity) is a putative mechanism for cooperation in social dilemma situations with which players help others when they are helped by somebody else. It is a type of indirect reciprocity. Although upstream reciprocity is often observed in experiments, most theories suggest that it is operative only when players form short cycles such as triangles, implying a small population size, or when it is combined with other mechanisms that promote cooperation on their own. An expectation is that real social networks, which are known to be full of triangles and other short cycles, may accommodate upstream reciprocity. In this study, I extend the upstream reciprocity game proposed for a directed cycle by Boyd and Richerson to the case of general networks. The model is not evolutionary and concerns the conditions under which the unanimity of cooperative players is a Nash equilibrium. I show that an abundance of triangles or other short cycles in a network does little to promote upstream reciprocity. Cooperation is less likely for a larger population size even if triangles are abundant in the network. In addition, in contrast to the results for evolutionary social dilemma games on networks, scale-free networks lead to less cooperation than networks with a homogeneous degree distribution.     

Forgiver Triumphs in Alternating Prisoner's Dilemma

Cooperative behavior, where one individual incurs a cost to help another, is a wide spread phenomenon. Here we study direct reciprocity in the context of the alternating Prisoner''s Dilemma. We consider all strategies that can be implemented by one and two-state automata. We calculate the payoff matrix of all pairwise encounters in the presence of noise. We explore deterministic selection dynamics with and without mutation. Using different error rates and payoff values, we observe convergence to a small number of distinct equilibria. Two of them are uncooperative strict Nash equilibria representing always-defect (ALLD) and Grim. The third equilibrium is mixed and represents a cooperative alliance of several strategies, dominated by a strategy which we call Forgiver. Forgiver cooperates whenever the opponent has cooperated; it defects once when the opponent has defected, but subsequently Forgiver attempts to re-establish cooperation even if the opponent has defected again. Forgiver is not an evolutionarily stable strategy, but the alliance, which it rules, is asymptotically stable. For a wide range of parameter values the most commonly observed outcome is convergence to the mixed equilibrium, dominated by Forgiver. Our results show that although forgiving might incur a short-term loss it can lead to a long-term gain. Forgiveness facilitates stable cooperation in the presence of exploitation and noise.     

Rare but severe concerted punishment that favors cooperation

As one of the mechanisms that are supposed to explain the evolution of cooperation among unrelated individuals, costly punishment, in which altruistic individuals privately bear the cost to punish defection, suffers from such drawbacks as decreasing individuals’ welfare, inducing second-order free riding, the difficulty of catching defection, and the possibility of triggering retaliation. To improve this promising mechanism, here we propose an extended Public Goods game with rare but severe concerted punishment, in which once a defector is caught punishment is triggered and the cost of punishment is equally shared among the remainder of the group. Analytical results show that, when the probability for concerted punishment is above a threshold, cooperating is, while defecting is not, an evolutionarily stable strategy in finite populations, and that this way of punishment can considerably decrease the total cost of inhibiting defection, especially in large populations.     

Stability in negotiation games and the emergence of cooperation

Consider a two-player game in which each player contributes a costly resource to the common good of the pair. For such contests, the Nash equilibrium contribution, x*, is one for which neither player can increase its pay-off by unilaterally altering its contribution from x*. We study an elaboration of this game, which allows the players to exchange x-offers back and forth in a negotiation phase until they converge to a final pair of contributions, x1 and x2. A significant feature of such negotiation games, hitherto unrecognized, is the existence of a set of neutrally stable equilibrium points in negotiation phase space. To explore the long-term evolutionary outcome of such games, we simulate populations containing various mixtures of negotiation strategies and, contrary to previous results, we often find convergence to a contribution that is more cooperative than the Nash equilibrium. Mathematical analysis suggests why this might be happening, and provides a novel and robust explanation for cooperation, that negotiation can facilitate the evolution of cooperative behaviour.     

Tag-based indirect reciprocity by incomplete social information

Evolution of altruistic behaviour in interacting individuals is accounted for by, for example, kin selection, direct reciprocity, spatially limited interaction and indirect reciprocity. Real social agents, particularly humans, often take actions based on similarity between themselves and others. Although tag-based indirect reciprocity in which altruism occurs exclusively among similar flocks is a natural expectation, its mechanism has not really been established. We propose a model of tag-based indirect reciprocity by assuming that each player may note strategies of others. We show that tag-based altruism can evolve to eradicate other strategies, including unconditional defectors for various initial strategy configurations and parameter sets. A prerequisite for altruism is that the strategy is sometimes, but not always, visible to others. Without visibility of strategies, policing does not take place and defection is optimal. With perfect visibility, what a player does is always witnessed by others and cooperation is optimal. In the intermediate regime, discriminators based on tag proximity, rather than mixture of generous players and defectors, are most likely to evolve. In this situation, altruism is realized based on homophily in which players are exclusively good to similar others.     

The good, the bad and the discriminator--errors in direct and indirect reciprocity

This paper presents, in a series of simple diagrams, concise results about the replicator dynamics of direct and indirect reciprocity. We consider repeated interactions between donors and recipients, and analyse the relationship between three basic strategies for the donor: unconditional cooperation, all-out defection, and conditional cooperation. In other words, we investigate the competition of discriminating and indiscriminating altruists with defectors. Discriminators and defectors form a bistable community, and hence a population of discriminators cannot be invaded by defectors. But unconditional altruists can invade a discriminating population and 'soften it up' for a subsequent invasion by defectors. The resulting dynamics exhibits various forms of rock-paper-scissors cycles and depends in subtle ways on noise, in the form of errors in implementation. The probability for another round (in the case of direct reciprocity), and information about the co-player (in the case of indirect reciprocity), add further elements to the ecology of reciprocation.     

Effect of Resource Spatial Correlation and Hunter-Fisher-Gatherer Mobility on Social Cooperation in Tierra del Fuego

This article presents an agent-based model designed to explore the development of cooperation in hunter-fisher-gatherer societies that face a dilemma of sharing an unpredictable resource that is randomly distributed in space. The model is a stylised abstraction of the Yamana society, which inhabited the channels and islands of the southernmost part of Tierra del Fuego (Argentina-Chile). According to ethnographic sources, the Yamana developed cooperative behaviour supported by an indirect reciprocity mechanism: whenever someone found an extraordinary confluence of resources, such as a beached whale, they would use smoke signals to announce their find, bringing people together to share food and exchange different types of social capital. The model provides insight on how the spatial concentration of beachings and agents’ movements in the space can influence cooperation. We conclude that the emergence of informal and dynamic communities that operate as a vigilance network preserves cooperation and makes defection very costly.     

The cost of cowardice: punitive sentiments towards free riders in Turkana raids

Models indicate that large-scale cooperation can be sustained by indirect reciprocity or direct punishment, but the relative importance of these mechanisms is unresolved. Unlike direct punishment, indirect sanctions can be meted out without cost to the sanctioner, but direct punishment is advantageous when the scale of cooperation exceeds the network size of individuals. It is of great interest to assess the importance of these mechanisms in small-scale acephalous groups in which people have lived for most of our evolutionary history. Here we evaluate sentiments towards free riders in combat among the Turkana, an acephalous nomadic pastoral society in East Africa who periodically mobilize for cattle-raids against neighboring ethnic groups. Using vignette studies, we probed participants’ motivation to sanction fictitious warriors who were cowards or deserters in a raid and compared it respectively to their reactions to an unskilled warrior or a warrior who turns back due to illness. Our results indicate that the Turkana are motivated to impose both indirect and direct sanctions on cowards consistent with indirect reciprocity and punishment models of cooperation. Our findings imply that both these mechanisms have shaped human cooperative psychology, and sheds light on how prestate societies solve the collective action problem in warfare.