IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/chsofr/v91y2016icp689-694.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Surrounding information consideration promotes cooperation in Prisoner’s dilemma game

Author

Listed:
  • Shu, Gang
  • Du, Xia
  • Li, Ya

Abstract

Evolutionary game theory provides a useful, integrative framework for studying the evolution of cooperation. A new strategy updating method is proposed in our model. Due to people with diversified thinking, players are divided into two categories based on their different strategy updating method: ordinary players and advanced players. The former players only consider their neighbor’s payoff and updating strategy by classical Fermi rule, while the latter players take both the neighbors’ surrounding information and payoff into account. The results show that the neighbors surrounding information consideration contributes to the evolution of cooperation and finds the fraction of cooperation grows evidently with the increase of advanced players numbers. Our model may provide a pragmatic approach to the research of cooperation in social network.

Suggested Citation

  • Shu, Gang & Du, Xia & Li, Ya, 2016. "Surrounding information consideration promotes cooperation in Prisoner’s dilemma game," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 689-694.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:chsofr:v:91:y:2016:i:c:p:689-694
    DOI: 10.1016/j.chaos.2016.09.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960077916302569
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.chaos.2016.09.004?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. Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, 1999. "A Theory of Fairness, Competition, and Cooperation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(3), pages 817-868.
    2. Keizo Shigaki & Zhen Wang & Jun Tanimoto & Eriko Fukuda, 2013. "Effect of Initial Fraction of Cooperators on Cooperative Behavior in Evolutionary Prisoner's Dilemma Game," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(11), pages 1-7, November.
    3. Ozkan-Canbolat, Ela & Beraha, Aydin, 2016. "Evolutionary knowledge games in social networks," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1807-1811.
    4. Axel Ockenfels & Gary E. Bolton, 2000. "ERC: A Theory of Equity, Reciprocity, and Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(1), pages 166-193, March.
    5. Kokubo, Satoshi & Wang, Zhen & Tanimoto, Jun, 2015. "Spatial reciprocity for discrete, continuous and mixed strategy setups," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 259(C), pages 552-568.
    6. Laird, Robert A. & Goyal, Dipankar & Yazdani, Soroosh, 2013. "Geometry of ‘standoffs’ in lattice models of the spatial Prisoner’s Dilemma and Snowdrift games," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 392(17), pages 3622-3633.
    7. Hisashi Ohtsuki & Christoph Hauert & Erez Lieberman & Martin A. Nowak, 2006. "A simple rule for the evolution of cooperation on graphs and social networks," Nature, Nature, vol. 441(7092), pages 502-505, May.
    8. Ding, Shuai & Wang, Juan & Ruan, Sumei & Xia, Chengyi, 2015. "Inferring to individual diversity promotes the cooperation in the spatial prisoner’s dilemma game," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 91-99.
    9. Chen, Xiaojie & Fu, Feng & Wang, Long, 2008. "Promoting cooperation by local contribution under stochastic win-stay-lose-shift mechanism," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 387(22), pages 5609-5615.
    10. Hu, Menglong & Wang, Juan & Kong, Lingcong & An, Kang & Bi, Tao & Guo, Baohong & Dong, Enzeng, 2015. "Incorporating the information from direct and indirect neighbors into fitness evaluation enhances the cooperation in the social dilemmas," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 47-52.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Quan, Ji & Zhou, Yawen & Wang, Xianjia & Yang, Jian-Bo, 2020. "Information fusion based on reputation and payoff promotes cooperation in spatial public goods game," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 368(C).
    2. Liu, Yuan & Cao, Lixuan & Wu, Bin, 2022. "General non-linear imitation leads to limit cycles in eco-evolutionary dynamics," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 165(P2).
    3. Quan, Ji & Zhou, Yawen & Wang, Xianjia & Yang, Jian-Bo, 2020. "Evidential reasoning based on imitation and aspiration information in strategy learning promotes cooperation in optional spatial public goods game," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    4. Kojo, Ken'ichi & Sakiyama, Tomoko, 2024. "Restructuring of neighborhood definition based on strategies will enhance the cooperation in a spatial prisoner's dilemma," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    5. Lu, Shounan & Zhu, Ge & Dai, Jianhua, 2023. "Promoting effect of adaptive interaction based on random neighbors to cooperation in the spatial prisoner's dilemma game," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 450(C).
    6. Wang, Si-Yi & Wang, Qing-Lian & Zhang, Xiao-Wei & Wang, Rui-Wu, 2023. "Evolutionary cooperation dynamics of combining imitation and super-rational aspiration induced strategy updating," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 456(C).

    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. Xiaofeng Wang & Xiaojie Chen & Long Wang, 2020. "Evolution of egalitarian social norm by resource management," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(1), pages 1-16, January.
    2. Agnes Bäker & Werner Güth & Kerstin Pull & Manfred Stadler, 2012. "On the Context-Dependency of Inequality Aversion - Experimental Evidence and a Stylized Model -," Jena Economics Research Papers 2012-023, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    3. David J. Cooper & Krista Saral & Marie Claire Villeval, 2021. "Why Join a Team?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(11), pages 6980-6997, November.
    4. Ellingsen, Tore & Johannesson, Magnus, 2009. "Time is not money," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 96-102, October.
    5. Becchetti, Leonardo & Degli Antoni, Giacomo & Ottone, Stefania & Solferino, Nazaria, 2013. "Allocation criteria under task performance: The gendered preference for protection," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 96-111.
    6. Mujcic, Redzo & Frijters, Paul, 2013. "Still Not Allowed on the Bus: It Matters If You're Black or White!," IZA Discussion Papers 7300, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Christian Thöni, 2014. "Inequality aversion and antisocial punishment," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 76(4), pages 529-545, April.
    8. Yukihiko Funaki & Emmanuel Sol & Marc Willinger, 2021. "Equal division among the few: an experiment about a coalition formation game," CEE-M Working Papers hal-03227388, CEE-M, Universtiy of Montpellier, CNRS, INRA, Montpellier SupAgro.
    9. Engelmann, Dirk, 2012. "How not to extend models of inequality aversion," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 599-605.
    10. Adrian Bruhin & Ernst Fehr & Daniel Schunk, 2019. "The many Faces of Human Sociality: Uncovering the Distribution and Stability of Social Preferences," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 17(4), pages 1025-1069.
    11. Benito Arruñada & Marcos Casarin & Francesca Pancotto, 2012. "Are Self-regarding Subjects More Rational?," Working Papers 611, Barcelona School of Economics.
    12. Vollmer Uwe, 2004. "Streissler, E.W. (Hrsg.), Studien zur Entwicklung der ökonomischen Theorie XIX," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 224(6), pages 758-759, December.
    13. Emin Karagözoğlu & Elif Tosun, 2022. "Endogenous Game Choice and Giving Behavior in Distribution Games," Games, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-32, November.
    14. Menusch Khadjavi, 2018. "Deterrence works for criminals," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 165-178, August.
    15. Christine Harbring & Bernd Irlenbusch, 2005. "Incentives in Tournaments with Endogenous Prize Selection," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 161(4), pages 636-663, December.
    16. Bhaskar, V & Holden, Steinar, 2002. "Wage Differentiation via Subsidised General Training," Economics Discussion Papers 8851, University of Essex, Department of Economics.
    17. Christoph Engel & Luigi Mittone & Azzurra Morreale, 2024. "Outcomes or participation? Experimentally testing competing sources of legitimacy for taxation," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 62(2), pages 563-583, April.
    18. Lackner, Mario & Sonnabend, Hendrik, 2021. "Coping with advantageous inequity—Field evidence from professional penalty kicking," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    19. Falch, Ranveig, 2021. "How Do People Trade Off Resources Between Quick and Slow Learners?," Discussion Paper Series in Economics 5/2021, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Economics.
    20. Ubeda, Paloma, 2014. "The consistency of fairness rules: An experimental study," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 88-100.

    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:91:y:2016:i:c:p:689-694. 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.