IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pcbi00/1011228.html

Grouping promotes both partnership and rivalry with long memory in direct reciprocity

Author

Listed:
  • Yohsuke Murase
  • Seung Ki Baek

Abstract

Biological and social scientists have long been interested in understanding how to reconcile individual and collective interests in the iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma. Many effective strategies have been proposed, and they are often categorized into one of two classes, ‘partners’ and ‘rivals.’ More recently, another class, ‘friendly rivals,’ has been identified in longer-memory strategy spaces. Friendly rivals qualify as both partners and rivals: They fully cooperate with themselves, like partners, but never allow their co-players to earn higher payoffs, like rivals. Although they have appealing theoretical properties, it is unclear whether they would emerge in an evolving population because most previous works focus on the memory-one strategy space, where no friendly rival strategy exists. To investigate this issue, we have conducted evolutionary simulations in well-mixed and group-structured populations and compared the evolutionary dynamics between memory-one and longer-memory strategy spaces. In a well-mixed population, the memory length does not make a major difference, and the key factors are the population size and the benefit of cooperation. Friendly rivals play a minor role because being a partner or a rival is often good enough in a given environment. It is in a group-structured population that memory length makes a stark difference: When longer-memory strategies are available, friendly rivals become dominant, and the cooperation level nearly reaches a maximum, even when the benefit of cooperation is so low that cooperation would not be achieved in a well-mixed population. This result highlights the important interaction between group structure and memory lengths that drive the evolution of cooperation.Author summary: In the evolution of cooperation, to what extent is cognitive capacity essential? The social brain hypothesis argued that the brain size of primates has increased with the social group size to manage complex social interactions, e.g., to reciprocate cooperation and punish free riders. On the other hand, in the study of the repeated Prisoner’s Dilemma, it has been shown that simple strategies that remember only the previous round can unilaterally control the payoffs even against more sophisticated strategies having longer memories. Thus, it is not straightforward to answer the question of how the evolution of cooperation changes when players are accessible to more elaborate memory-demanding strategies. This paper studies this question through evolutionary simulations and found that longer memory strategies substantially change the picture when the population has an internal structure. This study thus suggests the joint impact between cognitive capacity and the population structure in the evolution of cooperation, although these have often been studied independently.

Suggested Citation

  • Yohsuke Murase & Seung Ki Baek, 2023. "Grouping promotes both partnership and rivalry with long memory in direct reciprocity," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(6), pages 1-23, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1011228
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1011228
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1011228
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1011228&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1011228?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christian Hilbe & Krishnendu Chatterjee & Martin A. Nowak, 2018. "Partners and rivals in direct reciprocity," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 2(7), pages 469-477, July.
    2. Laura Schmid & Krishnendu Chatterjee & Christian Hilbe & Martin A. Nowak, 2021. "A unified framework of direct and indirect reciprocity," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 5(10), pages 1292-1302, October.
    3. 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.
    4. Yohsuke Murase & Seung Ki Baek, 2021. "Friendly-rivalry solution to the iterated n-person public-goods game," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(1), pages 1-17, January.
    5. Ethan Akin, 2015. "What You Gotta Know to Play Good in the Iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma," Games, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-16, June.
    6. Duersch, Peter & Oechssler, Jörg & Schipper, Burkhard C., 2012. "Unbeatable imitation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 88-96.
    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. Qi Su & Hongyu Wang & Yu Xia & Long Wang, 2026. "A multi-agent reinforcement learning framework for exploring dominant strategies in iterated and evolutionary games," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 17(1), pages 1-14, December.

    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. Masahiko Ueda & Toshiyuki Tanaka, 2020. "Linear algebraic structure of zero-determinant strategies in repeated games," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-13, April.
    2. Yang, Shike & Hu, Xincheng & Shi, Haobin & Chen, Qiang & Ma, Fei, 2026. "Cooperation dynamics in multilayer networks under recommendation and vigilance mechanisms," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 202(P1).
    3. Quan, Ji & Chen, Xinyue & Wang, Xianjia, 2024. "Repeated prisoner's dilemma games in multi-player structured populations with crosstalk," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 473(C).
    4. Philip LaPorte & Christian Hilbe & Martin A Nowak, 2023. "Adaptive dynamics of memory-one strategies in the repeated donation game," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(6), pages 1-31, June.
    5. Kang, Kai & Tian, Jinyan & Zhang, Boyu, 2024. "Cooperation and control in asymmetric repeated games," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 470(C).
    6. Zhou, Zhizhuo & Rong, Zhihai & Yang, Wen & Wu, Zhi-Xi, 2024. "Coevolution of extortion strategies with mixed imitation and aspiration learning dynamics in spatial Prisoner’s Dilemma game," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    7. Baumgartner, Nora & Sloot, Daniel & Günther, Anne & Hahnel, Ulf J.J., 2025. "Development and test of a dual-pathway model of personal and community factors driving new energy technology adoption - The case of V2G in three European countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 230(C).
    8. Molnar, Grant & Hammond, Caroline & Fu, Feng, 2023. "Reactive means in the iterated Prisoner’s dilemma," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 458(C).
    9. Zhou, Biheng & Rong, Zhihai & Yu, Xiang, 2025. "Equalizing payoffs of a structured population in repeated Prisoner’s Dilemma game," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    10. 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.
    11. Peter S. Park & Martin A. Nowak & Christian Hilbe, 2022. "Cooperation in alternating interactions with memory constraints," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-11, December.
    12. Yohsuke Murase & Seung Ki Baek, 2021. "Friendly-rivalry solution to the iterated n-person public-goods game," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(1), pages 1-17, January.
    13. Vincent Knight & Marc Harper & Nikoleta E Glynatsi & Jonathan Gillard, 2024. "Recognising and evaluating the effectiveness of extortion in the Iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(7), pages 1-17, July.
    14. Ederer, Florian & Stremitzer, Alexander, 2017. "Promises and expectations," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 161-178.
    15. 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.
    16. Claudia M. Landeo & Kathryn E. Spier, 2016. "Stipulated Damages as a Rent-Extraction Mechanism: Experimental Evidence," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 172(2), pages 235-273, June.
    17. Mengyuan Zhou, 2022. "Does the Source of Inheritance Matter in Bequest Attitudes? Evidence from Japan," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 867-887, December.
    18. Guang Yang & Mulin Liu & Mei Cai & Qihua Yin, 2024. "An analytical game perspective model for pay-what-you-want pricing schemes considering consumer fairness," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 25(4), pages 345-365, December.
    19. Robert Jiro Netzer & Matthias Sutter, 2009. "Intercultural trust. An experiment in Austria and Japan," Working Papers 2009-05, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    20. David J. Cooper & Krista Saral & Marie Claire Villeval, 2021. "Why Join a Team?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(11), pages 6980-6997, November.

    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:pcbi00:1011228. 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.