Literature DB >> 29339478

Cooperation, clustering, and assortative mixing in dynamic networks.

David Melamed1, Ashley Harrell2, Brent Simpson3.   

Abstract

Humans' propensity to cooperate is driven by our embeddedness in social networks. A key mechanism through which networks promote cooperation is clustering. Within clusters, conditional cooperators are insulated from exploitation by noncooperators, allowing them to reap the benefits of cooperation. Dynamic networks, where ties can be shed and new ties formed, allow for the endogenous emergence of clusters of cooperators. Although past work suggests that either reputation processes or network dynamics can increase clustering and cooperation, existing work on network dynamics conflates reputations and dynamics. Here we report results from a large-scale experiment (total n = 2,675) that embedded participants in clustered or random networks that were static or dynamic, with varying levels of reputational information. Results show that initial network clustering predicts cooperation in static networks, but not in dynamic ones. Further, our experiment shows that while reputations are important for partner choice, cooperation levels are driven purely by dynamics. Supplemental conditions confirmed this lack of a reputation effect. Importantly, we find that when participants make individual choices to cooperate or defect with each partner, as opposed to a single decision that applies to all partners (as is standard in the literature on cooperation in networks), cooperation rates in static networks are as high as cooperation rates in dynamic networks. This finding highlights the importance of structured relations for sustained cooperation, and shows how giving experimental participants more realistic choices has important consequences for whether dynamic networks promote higher levels of cooperation than static networks.

Entities:  

Keywords:  altruism; cooperation; dynamic networks; network science; reputation

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29339478      PMCID: PMC5798352          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1715357115

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN: 0027-8424            Impact factor:   11.205


  28 in total

1.  The leading eight: social norms that can maintain cooperation by indirect reciprocity.

Authors:  Hisashi Ohtsuki; Yoh Iwasa
Journal:  J Theor Biol       Date:  2005-09-19       Impact factor: 2.691

2.  Evolution of cooperation by multilevel selection.

Authors:  Arne Traulsen; Martin A Nowak
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2006-07-07       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 3.  Five rules for the evolution of cooperation.

Authors:  Martin A Nowak
Journal:  Science       Date:  2006-12-08       Impact factor: 47.728

4.  Dynamic social networks promote cooperation in experiments with humans.

Authors:  David G Rand; Samuel Arbesman; Nicholas A Christakis
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-11-14       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 5.  Human cooperation.

Authors:  David G Rand; Martin A Nowak
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2013-07-13       Impact factor: 20.229

6.  Co-evolution of behaviour and social network structure promotes human cooperation.

Authors:  Katrin Fehl; Daniel J van der Post; Dirk Semmann
Journal:  Ecol Lett       Date:  2011-04-04       Impact factor: 9.492

7.  Partner Choice Drives the Evolution of Cooperation via Indirect Reciprocity.

Authors:  Gilbert Roberts
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-06-09       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Prosocial Orientation Alters Network Dynamics and Fosters Cooperation.

Authors:  David Melamed; Brent Simpson; Ashley Harrell
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-03-23       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Individual choices in dynamic networks: an experiment on social preferences.

Authors:  Dennie van Dolder; Vincent Buskens
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-04-14       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Reputation Effects in Social Networks Do Not Promote Cooperation: An Experimental Test of the Raub & Weesie Model.

Authors:  Rense Corten; Stephanie Rosenkranz; Vincent Buskens; Karen S Cook
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-07-01       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  13 in total

1.  Human social preferences cluster and spread in the field.

Authors:  Alexander Ehlert; Martin Kindschi; René Algesheimer; Heiko Rauhut
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2020-09-01       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Self-regulation versus social influence for promoting cooperation on networks.

Authors:  Dario Madeo; Chiara Mocenni
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-03-16       Impact factor: 4.379

3.  Tightly Bound: The Relationship of Network Clustering Coefficients and Reincarceration at Three Therapeutic Communities.

Authors:  Keith Warren; Benjamin Campbell; Skyler Cranmer
Journal:  J Stud Alcohol Drugs       Date:  2020-09       Impact factor: 2.582

4.  The strength of dynamic ties: The ability to alter some ties promotes cooperation in those that cannot be altered.

Authors:  Ashley Harrell; David Melamed; Brent Simpson
Journal:  Sci Adv       Date:  2018-12-05       Impact factor: 14.136

5.  Low-cost, high-impact altruistic punishment promotes cooperation cascades in human social networks.

Authors:  Robert M Bond
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-02-14       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Direct reciprocity and model-predictive rationality explain network reciprocity over social ties.

Authors:  Fabio Dercole; Fabio Della Rossa; Carlo Piccardi
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Network Engineering Using Autonomous Agents Increases Cooperation in Human Groups.

Authors:  Hirokazu Shirado; Nicholas A Christakis
Journal:  iScience       Date:  2020-08-06

8.  Free neighborhood choice boosts socially optimal outcomes in stag-hunt coordination problem.

Authors:  Arno Riedl; Ingrid M T Rohde; Martin Strobel
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-04-08       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Individual- and group-level network-building interventions to address social isolation and loneliness: A scoping review with implications for COVID19.

Authors:  Reza Yousefi Nooraie; Keith Warren; Lisa A Juckett; Qiuchang A Cao; Alicia C Bunger; Michele A Patak-Pietrafesa
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-06-25       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  A science of collaborative learning health systems.

Authors:  Michael Seid; David M Hartley; Peter A Margolis
Journal:  Learn Health Syst       Date:  2021-06-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.