IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/chsofr/v169y2023ics0960077923001194.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reputation update of responders efficiently promotes the evolution of fairness in the ultimatum game

Author

Listed:
  • Zhang, Yanling
  • Yang, Shuo
  • Chen, Xiaojie
  • Bai, Yanbing
  • Xie, Guangming

Abstract

Recently, exploration on how to sustain cooperation based on indirect reciprocity has obtained considerable concern. However, thus far few studies have investigated the effects of indirect reciprocity with shared social norms on fairness in the ultimatum game (UG), which has been a prominent paradigm for studying the evolution of fairness. In this paper, we introduce indirect reciprocity with social norms into the UG. We consider three scenarios, (1) reputation of proposers updates alone, (2) reputation of responders updates alone, and (3) reputation of both proposers and responders updates. By a two-timescale theoretical analysis, we find that reputation update of proposers alone leads to a higher level of fairness than the one without reputation under lots of social norms, and that reputation update of responders alone generates a very high level of fairness under image scoring. For the majority of the third-order social norms, the effect of proposers’ reputation update on fairness can be enhanced when it is combined with reputation update of responders. The excellent positive effect of responders’ reputation update on fairness cannot be enhanced when it is combined with reputation update of proposers under all social norms. The key factor for the high level of fairness is up to the dominance of the strategies with rejecting unfair offers in the pairwise competition, suggesting the behavior of altruistic punishment can emerge in the population.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhang, Yanling & Yang, Shuo & Chen, Xiaojie & Bai, Yanbing & Xie, Guangming, 2023. "Reputation update of responders efficiently promotes the evolution of fairness in the ultimatum game," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:chsofr:v:169:y:2023:i:c:s0960077923001194
    DOI: 10.1016/j.chaos.2023.113218
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960077923001194
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.chaos.2023.113218?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Güth, Werner & Kocher, Martin G., 2014. "More than thirty years of ultimatum bargaining experiments: Motives, variations, and a survey of the recent literature," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 396-409.
    2. Zhang, Yanling & Chen, Xiaojie & Liu, Aizhi & Sun, Changyin, 2018. "The effect of the stake size on the evolution of fairness," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 321(C), pages 641-653.
    3. Yanling Zhang & Feng Fu, 2018. "Strategy intervention for the evolution of fairness," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(5), pages 1-13, May.
    4. Yanling Zhang & Jian Liu & Aming Li, 2019. "Effects of Empathy on the Evolutionary Dynamics of Fairness in Group-Structured Systems," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2019, pages 1-13, November.
    5. Fernando P. Santos & Francisco C. Santos & Jorge M. Pacheco, 2018. "Social norm complexity and past reputations in the evolution of cooperation," Nature, Nature, vol. 555(7695), pages 242-245, March.
    6. Kevin Hu & Feng Fu, 2021. "Evolutionary Dynamics of Gig Economy Labor Strategies under Technology, Policy and Market Influence," Games, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-31, June.
    7. Li, Kun & Mao, Yizhou & Wei, Zhenlin & Cong, Rui, 2021. "Pool-rewarding in N-person snowdrift game," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    8. Martin A. Nowak & Karl Sigmund, 2005. "Evolution of indirect reciprocity," Nature, Nature, vol. 437(7063), pages 1291-1298, October.
    9. Deng, Lili & Lin, Ying & Wang, Cheng & Xu, Ronghua & Zhou, Gengui, 2020. "Effects of coupling strength and coupling schemes between interdependent lattices on the evolutionary ultimatum game," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 540(C).
    10. Sun, Ketian & Liu, Yang & Chen, Xiaojie & Szolnoki, Attila, 2022. "Evolution of trust in a hierarchical population with punishing investors," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    11. Isamu Okada, 2020. "A Review of Theoretical Studies on Indirect Reciprocity," Games, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-17, July.
    12. Kang, Zengxin & Zhang, Lei & Li, Kun, 2019. "An improved social force model for pedestrian dynamics in shipwrecks," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 348(C), pages 355-362.
    13. Zhao, Yakun & Xiong, Tianyu & Zheng, Lei & Li, Yumeng & Chen, Xiaojie, 2020. "The effect of similarity on the evolution of fairness in the ultimatum game," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    14. A. Szolnoki & M. Perc, 2009. "Promoting cooperation in social dilemmas via simple coevolutionary rules," The European Physical Journal B: Condensed Matter and Complex Systems, Springer;EDP Sciences, vol. 67(3), pages 337-344, February.
    15. Qi Su & Alex McAvoy & Yoichiro Mori & Joshua B. Plotkin, 2022. "Evolution of prosocial behaviours in multilayer populations," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 6(3), pages 338-348, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zhang, Zhipeng & Wu, Yu’e & Zhang, Shuhua, 2022. "Reputation-based asymmetric comparison of fitness promotes cooperation on complex networks," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 608(P1).
    2. Laura Schmid & Farbod Ekbatani & Christian Hilbe & Krishnendu Chatterjee, 2023. "Quantitative assessment can stabilize indirect reciprocity under imperfect information," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-14, December.
    3. Chen, Wei & Zhu, Qianlong & Wu, Te, 2023. "Unfairness promotes the evolution of cooperation," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 438(C).
    4. Christian Hilbe & Maria Kleshnina & Kateřina Staňková, 2023. "Evolutionary Games and Applications: Fifty Years of ‘The Logic of Animal Conflict’," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 1035-1048, December.
    5. Tian, Xiaoyong & Li, Kun & Kang, Zengxin & Peng, Yun & Cui, Hongjun, 2020. "Simulating the dynamical features of evacuation governed by periodic vibrations," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    6. Zhu, Wenqiang & Pan, Qiuhui & He, Mingfeng, 2022. "Exposure-based reputation mechanism promotes the evolution of cooperation," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    7. Ping Zhu & Guiyi Wei, 2014. "Stochastic Heterogeneous Interaction Promotes Cooperation in Spatial Prisoner's Dilemma Game," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(4), pages 1-10, April.
    8. Li, Qiaoru & Zhang, Zhe & Li, Kun & Chen, Liang & Wei, Zhenlin & Zhang, Jingchun, 2020. "Evolutionary dynamics of traveling behavior in social networks," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 545(C).
    9. Yanling Zhang & Feng Fu, 2018. "Strategy intervention for the evolution of fairness," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(5), pages 1-13, May.
    10. Li, Bing & Zhao, Xiaowei & Xia, Haoxiang, 2019. "Promotion of cooperation by Hybrid Migration mechanisms in the Spatial Prisoner’s Dilemma Game," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 514(C), pages 1-8.
    11. Lv, Shaojie & Song, Feifei, 2022. "Particle swarm intelligence and the evolution of cooperation in the spatial public goods game with punishment," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 412(C).
    12. Dong, Yukun & Xu, Hedong & Fan, Suohai, 2019. "Memory-based stag hunt game on regular lattices," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 519(C), pages 247-255.
    13. Tamas David-Barrett, 2022. "Clustering Drives Cooperation on Reputation Networks, All Else Fixed," Papers 2203.00372, arXiv.org.
    14. Quan, Ji & Nie, Jiacheng & Chen, Wenman & Wang, Xianjia, 2022. "Keeping or reversing social norms promote cooperation by enhancing indirect reciprocity," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    15. Isamu Okada, 2020. "A Review of Theoretical Studies on Indirect Reciprocity," Games, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-17, July.
    16. Chen, Qin & Pan, Qiuhui & He, Mingfeng, 2022. "The influence of quasi-cooperative strategy on social dilemma evolution," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    17. Danilo Liuzzi & Aymeric Vié, 2022. "Staring at the Abyss: a neurocognitive grounded agent-based model of collective-risk social dilemma under the threat of environmental disaster," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 17(2), pages 613-637, April.
    18. Deming Mao & Xiaoyu Li & Dejun Mu & Dujuan Liu & Chen Chu, 2021. "Separated interactive behaviors promote cooperation in the spatial prisoner’s dilemma game," The European Physical Journal B: Condensed Matter and Complex Systems, Springer;EDP Sciences, vol. 94(7), pages 1-9, July.
    19. Deng, Lili & Zhang, Xingxing & Wang, Cheng, 2021. "Coevolution of spatial ultimatum game and link weight promotes fairness," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 392(C).
    20. Du, Jinming, 2019. "Redistribution promotes cooperation in spatial public goods games under aspiration dynamics," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 363(C), pages 1-1.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:chsofr:v:169:y:2023:i:c:s0960077923001194. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Thayer, Thomas R. (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/chaos-solitons-and-fractals .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.