Literature DB >> 29997059

A solution for private assessment in indirect reciprocity using solitary observation.

Isamu Okada1, Tatsuya Sasaki2, Yutaka Nakai3.   

Abstract

Although indirect reciprocity is a fundamental mechanism in the evolution of human cooperation, most studies assume public assessment in which individuals are not permitted to obtain private assessments of others. Existing studies on private assessment have used individual-based simulations because of the analytical difficulty involved. Here, we develop an analytical method using solitary observation to solve private assessment in indirect reciprocity problem without any approximation. In this study, we formulate a model of solitary observation and calculate the replicator dynamics systems of five leading norms of indirect reciprocity. Indirect reciprocity in private assessment provides a different result to that in public assessment. According to the existence proofs of cooperative evolutionarily stable (CES) points in the system, strict norms (stern judging and shunning) have no CES point in private assessment, while they do in public assessment. Image scoring does not change the system regardless of the assessment types because it does not use second-order information. In tolerant norms (simple standing and staying), the CES points move to co-existence of norms and unconditional cooperators. Despite the fact that there is no central coercive assessment system in private assessment, the average cooperation rate at the CES points in private assessment is greater than that in public assessment. This is because private assessment gives unconditional cooperators a role. Our results also show the superiority of the staying norm. Compared with simple standing, staying has three advantages in private assessment: a higher cooperation rate, easiness of invasion into defectors, and robustness to maintain cooperative evolutionarily stable situations. Our results are applicable to general social dilemmas in relation to private information. Under some dilemmas, norms or assessment rules should be carefully chosen to enable cooperation to evolve.
Copyright © 2018 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Evolution of cooperation; Evolutionary game theory; Indirect reciprocity; Private information

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29997059     DOI: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2018.06.018

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Theor Biol        ISSN: 0022-5193            Impact factor:   2.691


  9 in total

1.  Indirect reciprocity with private, noisy, and incomplete information.

Authors:  Christian Hilbe; Laura Schmid; Josef Tkadlec; Krishnendu Chatterjee; Martin A Nowak
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-11-14       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Reputation structure in indirect reciprocity under noisy and private assessment.

Authors:  Yuma Fujimoto; Hisashi Ohtsuki
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-06-22       Impact factor: 4.996

3.  Evolution of empathetic moral evaluation.

Authors:  Arunas L Radzvilavicius; Alexander J Stewart; Joshua B Plotkin
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2019-04-09       Impact factor: 8.713

4.  Two ways to overcome the three social dilemmas of indirect reciprocity.

Authors:  Isamu Okada
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-10-08       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  Social norms in indirect reciprocity with ternary reputations.

Authors:  Yohsuke Murase; Minjae Kim; Seung Ki Baek
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-01-10       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  The evolution of moral rules in a model of indirect reciprocity with private assessment.

Authors:  Cedric Perret; Marcus Krellner; The Anh Han
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-12-08       Impact factor: 4.996

7.  Adherence to public institutions that foster cooperation.

Authors:  Arunas L Radzvilavicius; Taylor A Kessinger; Joshua B Plotkin
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2021-06-11       Impact factor: 14.919

8.  Local stability of cooperation in a continuous model of indirect reciprocity.

Authors:  Sanghun Lee; Yohsuke Murase; Seung Ki Baek
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-07-09       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Experimental evidence of selective inattention in reputation-based cooperation.

Authors:  Isamu Okada; Hitoshi Yamamoto; Yoshiki Sato; Satoshi Uchida; Tatsuya Sasaki
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-10-04       Impact factor: 4.379

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.