IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/chsofr/v175y2023ip1s0960077923008883.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evolutionary dynamics of friendship-driven reputation strategies

Author

Listed:
  • Gao, Meng
  • Li, Zhi
  • Wu, Te

Abstract

Indirect reciprocity refers to a cooperative mechanism in which individuals evaluate each other’s reputation and take corresponding action. It is predicated on the idea that community members frequently discuss their opinions with each other and utilize the information to determine who deserves to cooperate with. When information is disseminated publicly, all community members are able to communicate on how each other has performed in the past. We combine balanced structural relationships in social networks with reputation strategies and find that friendship-driven reputation strategies can maintain cooperation and resist the invasion of defectors. Under the condition of rare mutations, several individual decision reputation strategies based on the partners’ evaluation can enjoy higher abundances in evolutionary races. In competition with ALLD, the strategy that rely on the negative partners’ opinions is outcompeted by ALLC. The reputation strategy based on the positive partners’ opinions always maintains a very high level of cooperation even for frequent mutations. We also find that in a heterogeneous population consisting of unconditional strategies and one of the reputation strategies, a chain reaction of defection occurs. Our results highlight the significant roles of friendship-driven reputation strategies in promoting cooperation when it is challenging for individuals to observe each other’s behavior but easy for them to share information on interacting experiences of third-party members.

Suggested Citation

  • Gao, Meng & Li, Zhi & Wu, Te, 2023. "Evolutionary dynamics of friendship-driven reputation strategies," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 175(P1).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:chsofr:v:175:y:2023:i:p1:s0960077923008883
    DOI: 10.1016/j.chaos.2023.113987
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960077923008883
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.chaos.2023.113987?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. Hu, Liwen & He, Nanrong & Weng, Qifeng & Chen, Xiaojie & Perc, Matjaž, 2020. "Rewarding endowments lead to a win-win in the evolution of public cooperation and the accumulation of common resources," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    2. Karthik Panchanathan & Robert Boyd, 2004. "Indirect reciprocity can stabilize cooperation without the second-order free rider problem," Nature, Nature, vol. 432(7016), pages 499-502, November.
    3. Wu, Te & Fu, Feng & Dou, Puxuan & Wang, Long, 2014. "Social influence promotes cooperation in the public goods game," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 413(C), pages 86-93.
    4. Christian Hilbe & Laura Schmid & Josef Tkadlec & Krishnendu Chatterjee & Martin A. Nowak, 2018. "Indirect reciprocity with private, noisy, and incomplete information," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 115(48), pages 12241-12246, 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. Martin A. Nowak & Karl Sigmund, 1998. "Evolution of indirect reciprocity by image scoring," Nature, Nature, vol. 393(6685), pages 573-577, June.
    7. M.A. Nowak & K. Sigmund, 1998. "Evolution of Indirect Reciprocity by Image Scoring/ The Dynamics of Indirect Reciprocity," Working Papers ir98040, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    8. Ernst Fehr & Urs Fischbacher, 2003. "The nature of human altruism," Nature, Nature, vol. 425(6960), pages 785-791, October.
    9. Martin A. Nowak & Karl Sigmund, 2005. "Evolution of indirect reciprocity," Nature, Nature, vol. 437(7063), pages 1291-1298, October.
    10. Daniel Clark & Drew Fudenberg & Alexander Wolitzky, 2020. "Indirect reciprocity with simple records," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 117(21), pages 11344-11349, May.
    11. Saptarshi Pal & Christian Hilbe, 2022. "Reputation effects drive the joint evolution of cooperation and social rewarding," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-11, December.
    12. Hisashi Ohtsuki & Yoh Iwasa & Martin A. Nowak, 2009. "Indirect reciprocity provides only a narrow margin of efficiency for costly punishment," Nature, Nature, vol. 457(7225), pages 79-82, January.
    13. Jörg Gross & Carsten K. W. Dreu, 2019. "The rise and fall of cooperation through reputation and group polarization," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 10(1), pages 1-10, December.
    14. Xing Fang & Xiaojie Chen, 2021. "Evolutionary dynamics of trust in the N-player trust game with individual reward and punishment," The European Physical Journal B: Condensed Matter and Complex Systems, Springer;EDP Sciences, vol. 94(9), pages 1-7, September.
    15. J. M. Meylahn & L. Janssen & Hassan Zargarzadeh, 2022. "Limiting Dynamics for Q-Learning with Memory One in Symmetric Two-Player, Two-Action Games," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2022, pages 1-20, November.
    16. Taha, Mohammad A. & Ghoneim, Ayman, 2021. "Zero-determinant strategies in infinitely repeated three-player prisoner's dilemma game," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    17. Arunas L. Radzvilavicius & Taylor A. Kessinger & Joshua B. Plotkin, 2021. "Author Correction: Adherence to public institutions that foster cooperation," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-3, December.
    18. Arunas L. Radzvilavicius & Taylor A. Kessinger & Joshua B. Plotkin, 2021. "Adherence to public institutions that foster cooperation," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-14, December.
    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. 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).
    2. Isamu Okada, 2020. "A Review of Theoretical Studies on Indirect Reciprocity," Games, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-17, July.
    3. 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.
    4. Wang, Xianjia & Ding, Rui & Zhao, Jinhua & Gu, Cuiling, 2022. "The rise and fall of cooperation in populations with multiple groups," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 413(C).
    5. Ding, Rui & Wang, Xianjia & Liu, Yang & Zhao, Jinhua & Gu, Cuiling, 2023. "Evolutionary games with environmental feedbacks under an external incentive mechanism," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    6. Simone Righi & Károly Takács, 2022. "Gossip: Perspective Taking to Establish Cooperation," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 1086-1100, December.
    7. 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.
    8. Charness, Gary & Du, Ninghua & Yang, Chun-Lei, 2011. "Trust and trustworthiness reputations in an investment game," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 361-375, June.
    9. Angelo Antoci & Luca Zarri, 2015. "Punish and perish?," Rationality and Society, , vol. 27(2), pages 195-223, May.
    10. Misato Inaba & Nobuyuki Takahashi, 2019. "Linkage Based on the Kandori Norm Successfully Sustains Cooperation in Social Dilemmas," Games, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-15, February.
    11. Boero, Riccardo & Bravo, Giangiacomo & Castellani, Marco & Squazzoni, Flaminio, 2009. "Reputational cues in repeated trust games," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 871-877, December.
    12. Wang, Xianjia & Ding, Rui & Zhao, Jinhua & Chen, Wenman & Gu, Cuiling, 2022. "Competition of punishment and reward among inequity-averse individuals in spatial public goods games," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    13. Manapat, Michael L. & Nowak, Martin A. & Rand, David G., 2013. "Information, irrationality, and the evolution of trust," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 90(S), pages 57-75.
    14. Radzvilavicius, Arunas, 2021. "Tolerant moral judgment drives evolution of collective action," OSF Preprints neq9g, Center for Open Science.
    15. Fernando P Santos & Francisco C Santos & Jorge M Pacheco, 2016. "Social Norms of Cooperation in Small-Scale Societies," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(1), pages 1-13, January.
    16. Isamu Okada & Hitoshi Yamamoto & Satoshi Uchida, 2020. "Hybrid Assessment Scheme Based on the Stern- Judging Rule for Maintaining Cooperation under Indirect Reciprocity," Games, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-10, February.
    17. Zhu, Wenqiang & Pan, Qiuhui & He, Mingfeng, 2022. "Exposure-based reputation mechanism promotes the evolution of cooperation," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    18. Suzuki, Shinsuke & Akiyama, Eizo, 2008. "Evolutionary stability of first-order-information indirect reciprocity in sizable groups," Theoretical Population Biology, Elsevier, vol. 73(3), pages 426-436.
    19. Wang, Zhen & Chen, Tong & Wang, Yongjie, 2017. "Leadership by example promotes the emergence of cooperation in public goods game," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 100-105.
    20. 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.

    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:175:y:2023:i:p1:s0960077923008883. 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.