IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pcbi00/1008847.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Avoiding the bullies: The resilience of cooperation among unequals

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Foley
  • Rory Smead
  • Patrick Forber
  • Christoph Riedl

Abstract

Can egalitarian norms or conventions survive the presence of dominant individuals who are ensured of victory in conflicts? We investigate the interaction of power asymmetry and partner choice in games of conflict over a contested resource. Previous models of cooperation do not include both power inequality and partner choice. Furthermore, models that do include power inequalities assume a static game where a bully’s advantage does not change. They have therefore not attempted to model complex and realistic properties of social interaction. Here, we introduce three models to study the emergence and resilience of cooperation among unequals when interaction is random, when individuals can choose their partners, and where power asymmetries dynamically depend on accumulated payoffs. We find that the ability to avoid bullies with higher competitive ability afforded by partner choice mostly restores cooperative conventions and that the competitive hierarchy never forms. Partner choice counteracts the hyper dominance of bullies who are isolated in the network and eliminates the need for others to coordinate in a coalition. When competitive ability dynamically depends on cumulative payoffs, complex cycles of coupled network-strategy-rank changes emerge. Effective collaborators gain popularity (and thus power), adopt aggressive behavior, get isolated, and ultimately lose power. Neither the network nor behavior converge to a stable equilibrium. Despite the instability of power dynamics, the cooperative convention in the population remains stable overall and long-term inequality is completely eliminated. The interaction between partner choice and dynamic power asymmetry is crucial for these results: without partner choice, bullies cannot be isolated, and without dynamic power asymmetry, bullies do not lose their power even when isolated. We analytically identify a single critical point that marks a phase transition in all three iterations of our models. This critical point is where the first individual breaks from the convention and cycles start to emerge.Author summary: Individuals often differ in their ability to resolve conflicts in their favor, and this can lead to the emergence of hierarchies and dominant alphas. Such social structures present a serious risk of destabilizing cooperative social interactions or norms. Why work together to find food when a more aggressive or stronger individual can take all of it? In this paper we use game theory and agent-based modeling to investigate how cooperative behavior evolves in the presence of powerful bullies who have no incentive to cooperate. We show that when individuals can choose their interaction partners, bullies do not always destabilize cooperation. Instead, cooperative norms survive as individuals learn to avoid dominant individuals who become isolated in the population. When competitive ability itself depends dynamically on past success, complex cycles of coupled network-strategy-rank changes emerge: effective collaborators gain popularity and thus power, adopt aggressive behavior, get isolated, then lose power. Our results have important implications: in our modeled scenario the rich do not always get richer, the dominance of bullies can be broken, and inequality in accrued resources can be eliminated. Thus, our work provides new insight into potential sources of, and strategies for avoiding, resource inequality.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Foley & Rory Smead & Patrick Forber & Christoph Riedl, 2021. "Avoiding the bullies: The resilience of cooperation among unequals," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(4), pages 1-18, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1008847
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008847
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008847
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008847&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008847?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fudenberg, Drew & Levine, David, 1998. "Learning in games," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(3-5), pages 631-639, May.
    2. Hargreaves Heap, Shaun P. & Ramalingam, Abhijit & Stoddard, Brock V., 2016. "Endowment inequality in public goods games: A re-examination," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 4-7.
    3. Cherry, Todd L. & Kroll, Stephan & Shogren, Jason F., 2005. "The impact of endowment heterogeneity and origin on public good contributions: evidence from the lab," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 357-365, July.
    4. Jackson, Matthew O. & Watts, Alison, 2002. "On the formation of interaction networks in social coordination games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 265-291, November.
    5. Aumann, Robert J., 1974. "Subjectivity and correlation in randomized strategies," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 67-96, March.
    6. Young, H Peyton, 1993. "The Evolution of Conventions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(1), pages 57-84, January.
    7. Sergiu Hart & Andreu Mas-Colell, 2013. "A Simple Adaptive Procedure Leading To Correlated Equilibrium," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Simple Adaptive Strategies From Regret-Matching to Uncoupled Dynamics, chapter 2, pages 17-46, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    8. Herings, P. Jean-Jacques & Mauleon, Ana & Vannetelbosch, Vincent, 2009. "Farsightedly stable networks," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 526-541, November.
    9. Vincent Boucher, 2015. "Structural Homophily," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 56, pages 235-264, February.
    10. Roth, Alvin E. & Erev, Ido, 1995. "Learning in extensive-form games: Experimental data and simple dynamic models in the intermediate term," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 164-212.
    11. Goyal, Sanjeev & Vega-Redondo, Fernando, 2005. "Network formation and social coordination," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 178-207, February.
    12. Alex McAvoy & Christoph Hauert, 2015. "Asymmetric Evolutionary Games," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(8), pages 1-26, August.
    13. Milena Tsvetkova & Vincent Buskens, 2013. "Coordination On Egalitarian Networks From Asymmetric Relations In A Social Game Of Chicken," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(01), pages 1-16.
    14. Matthew O. Jackson & Tomas Rodriguez-Barraquer & Xu Tan, 2012. "Social Capital and Social Quilts: Network Patterns of Favor Exchange," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(5), pages 1857-1897, August.
    15. Thomas Piketty & Emmanuel Saez, 2014. "Inequality in the long run," PSE-Ecole d'économie de Paris (Postprint) halshs-01053609, HAL.
    16. Beggs, A.W., 2005. "On the convergence of reinforcement learning," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 122(1), pages 1-36, May.
    17. 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.
    18. Francisco C Santos & Jorge M Pacheco & Tom Lenaerts, 2006. "Cooperation Prevails When Individuals Adjust Their Social Ties," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 2(10), pages 1-8, October.
    19. repec:hhs:iuiwop:487 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. John Duffy & Nick Feltovich, 2010. "Correlated Equilibria, Good And Bad: An Experimental Study," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 51(3), pages 701-721, August.
    21. Bardhan, Pranab, 2000. "Irrigation and Cooperation: An Empirical Analysis of 48 Irrigation Communities in South India," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 48(4), pages 847-865, July.
    22. Christian Hilbe & Štěpán Šimsa & Krishnendu Chatterjee & Martin A. Nowak, 2018. "Evolution of cooperation in stochastic games," Nature, Nature, vol. 559(7713), pages 246-249, July.
    23. Durham, Yvonne & Hirshleifer, Jack & Smith, Vernon L., 2008. "The Paradox of Power," Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, in: Charles R. Plott & Vernon L. Smith (ed.), Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 16, pages 127-137, Elsevier.
    24. Bramoulle, Yann, 2007. "Anti-coordination and social interactions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 30-49, January.
    25. Hauser, Oliver P. & Kraft-Todd, Gordon T. & Rand, David G. & Nowak, Martin A. & Norton, Michael I., 2021. "Invisible inequality leads to punishing the poor and rewarding the rich," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(3), pages 333-353, July.
    26. Bloch, Francis & Genicot, Garance & Ray, Debraj, 2008. "Informal insurance in social networks," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 143(1), pages 36-58, November.
    27. Erev, Ido & Roth, Alvin E, 1998. "Predicting How People Play Games: Reinforcement Learning in Experimental Games with Unique, Mixed Strategy Equilibria," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(4), pages 848-881, September.
    28. Benjamin Allen & Gabor Lippner & Yu-Ting Chen & Babak Fotouhi & Naghmeh Momeni & Shing-Tung Yau & Martin A. Nowak, 2017. "Evolutionary dynamics on any population structure," Nature, Nature, vol. 544(7649), pages 227-230, April.
    29. DeCanio, Stephen J. & Fremstad, Anders, 2013. "Game theory and climate diplomacy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 177-187.
    30. Bin Wu & Da Zhou & Feng Fu & Qingjun Luo & Long Wang & Arne Traulsen, 2010. "Evolution of Cooperation on Stochastic Dynamical Networks," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(6), pages 1-7, June.
    31. Vincent Boucher, 2015. "Structural Homophily," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 56(1), pages 235-264, February.
    32. Larry Samuelson, 2002. "Evolution and Game Theory," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(2), pages 47-66, Spring.
    33. Jorgen W. Weibull, 1997. "Evolutionary Game Theory," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262731215, April.
    34. Mike Mesterton-Gibbons & Tugba Karabiyik & Tom Sherratt, 2014. "The Iterated Hawk–Dove Game Revisited: The Effect of Ownership Uncertainty on Bourgeois as a Pure Convention," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 4(4), pages 407-431, December.
    35. Oliver P. Hauser & Christian Hilbe & Krishnendu Chatterjee & Martin A. Nowak, 2019. "Social dilemmas among unequals," Nature, Nature, vol. 572(7770), pages 524-527, August.
    36. Ostrom, Elinor & Walker, James & Gardner, Roy, 1992. "Covenants with and without a Sword: Self-Governance Is Possible," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 86(2), pages 404-417, June.
    37. Theodore C. Bergstrom, 2003. "The Algebra of Assortative Encounters and the Evolution of Cooperation," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 5(03), pages 211-228.
    38. Elena Miu & Ned Gulley & Kevin N. Laland & Luke Rendell, 2018. "Innovation and cumulative culture through tweaks and leaps in online programming contests," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 9(1), pages 1-8, December.
    39. Durham, Yvonne & Hirshleifer, Jack & Smith, Vernon L, 1998. "Do the Rich Get Richer and the Poor Poorer? Experimental Tests of a Model of Power," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(4), pages 970-983, September.
    40. Christoph Hauert & Michael Doebeli, 2004. "Spatial structure often inhibits the evolution of cooperation in the snowdrift game," Nature, Nature, vol. 428(6983), pages 643-646, April.
    41. Drew Fudenberg & David K. Levine, 1998. "The Theory of Learning in Games," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262061945, April.
    42. Jessica C. Flack & Michelle Girvan & Frans B. M. de Waal & David C. Krakauer, 2006. "Policing stabilizes construction of social niches in primates," Nature, Nature, vol. 439(7075), pages 426-429, January.
    43. Guala, Francesco & Mittone, Luigi, 2010. "How history and convention create norms: An experimental study," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 749-756, August.
    44. Foster, Dean P. & Vohra, Rakesh V., 1997. "Calibrated Learning and Correlated Equilibrium," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 21(1-2), pages 40-55, October.
    45. Ernst Fehr & Urs Fischbacher, 2004. "Social norms and human cooperation," Macroeconomics 0409026, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    46. Abdullah Almaatouq & Alejandro Noriega-Campero & Abdulrahman Alotaibi & P. M. Krafft & Mehdi Moussaid & Alex Pentland, 2020. "Adaptive social networks promote the wisdom of crowds," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 117(21), pages 11379-11386, May.
    47. Raj Chetty & Nathaniel Hendren & Lawrence F. Katz, 2016. "The Effects of Exposure to Better Neighborhoods on Children: New Evidence from the Moving to Opportunity Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(4), pages 855-902, April.
    48. repec:hal:pseose:halshs-01053609 is not listed on IDEAS
    49. Pemantle, Robin & Skyrms, Brian, 2004. "Network formation by reinforcement learning: the long and medium run," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 315-327, November.
    50. Jackson, Matthew O. & Watts, Alison, 2002. "The Evolution of Social and Economic Networks," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 106(2), pages 265-295, October.
    51. Flávio L Pinheiro & Jorge M Pacheco & Francisco C Santos, 2012. "From Local to Global Dilemmas in Social Networks," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(2), pages 1-6, February.
    52. Duncan J. Watts & Peter Sheridan Dodds, 2007. "Influentials, Networks, and Public Opinion Formation," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 34(4), pages 441-458, May.
    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. Zachary Fulker & Patrick Forber & Rory Smead & Christoph Riedl, 2022. "Spontaneous emergence of groups and signaling diversity in dynamic networks," Papers 2210.17309, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2024.
    2. Christoph Riedl & Tom Grad & Christopher Lettl, 2024. "Competition and Collaboration in Crowdsourcing Communities: What happens when peers evaluate each other?," Papers 2404.14141, arXiv.org.
    3. 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).

    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. Jackson, Matthew O. & Zenou, Yves, 2015. "Games on Networks," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,, Elsevier.
    2. Jonathan Newton, 2018. "Evolutionary Game Theory: A Renaissance," Games, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-67, May.
    3. Tassos Patokos, 2014. "Introducing Disappointment Dynamics and Comparing Behaviors in Evolutionary Games: Some Simulation Results," Games, MDPI, vol. 5(1), pages 1-25, January.
    4. Chernov, G. & Susin, I., 2019. "Models of learning in games: An overview," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 44(4), pages 77-125.
    5. Andreozzi, Luciano, 2013. "Learning to be fair," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 181-195.
    6. Germano, Fabrizio & Lugosi, Gabor, 2007. "Global Nash convergence of Foster and Young's regret testing," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 135-154, July.
    7. Jaromír Kovářík & Friederike Mengel & José Gabriel Romero, 2018. "Learning in network games," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 9(1), pages 85-139, March.
      • Kovarik, Jaromir & Mengel, Friederike & Romero, José Gabriel, 2012. "Learning in Network Games," IKERLANAK http://www-fae1-eao1-ehu-, Universidad del País Vasco - Departamento de Fundamentos del Análisis Económico I.
    8. Tom Johnston & Michael Savery & Alex Scott & Bassel Tarbush, 2023. "Game Connectivity and Adaptive Dynamics," Papers 2309.10609, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2024.
    9. Ianni, A., 2002. "Reinforcement learning and the power law of practice: some analytical results," Discussion Paper Series In Economics And Econometrics 203, Economics Division, School of Social Sciences, University of Southampton.
    10. Burkhard C. Schipper, 2022. "Strategic Teaching and Learning in Games," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 14(3), pages 321-352, August.
    11. Oyarzun, Carlos & Sarin, Rajiv, 2013. "Learning and risk aversion," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(1), pages 196-225.
    12. Rene Saran & Roberto Serrano, 2012. "Regret Matching with Finite Memory," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 160-175, March.
    13. Jacques Durieu & Philippe Solal, 2012. "Models of Adaptive Learning in Game Theory," Chapters, in: Richard Arena & Agnès Festré & Nathalie Lazaric (ed.), Handbook of Knowledge and Economics, chapter 11, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Ying-Fang Kao & Ragupathy Venkatachalam, 2021. "Human and Machine Learning," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 57(3), pages 889-909, March.
    15. Liu, Xuesong & Pan, Qiuhui & He, Mingfeng & Liu, Aizhi, 2019. "Promotion of cooperation in evolutionary game dynamics under asymmetric information," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 521(C), pages 258-266.
    16. Veller, Carl & Hayward, Laura K., 2016. "Finite-population evolution with rare mutations in asymmetric games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 93-113.
    17. Mengel, Friederike, 2012. "Learning across games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 74(2), pages 601-619.
    18. Schuster, Stephan, 2012. "Applications in Agent-Based Computational Economics," MPRA Paper 47201, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Koessler, Ann-Kathrin & Müller, Julia & Zitzelsberger, Sonja, 2023. "Asymmetric heterogeneities and the role of transfers in a public goods experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    20. Sergiu Hart & Yishay Mansour, 2013. "How Long To Equilibrium? The Communication Complexity Of Uncoupled Equilibrium Procedures," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Simple Adaptive Strategies From Regret-Matching to Uncoupled Dynamics, chapter 10, pages 215-249, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pcbi00:1008847. 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: ploscompbiol (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/ .

    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.