The evolution of punishment and apology: an iterated prisoner's dilemma model

被引:14
|
作者
Okamoto, K [1 ]
Matsumura, S [1 ]
机构
[1] Kyoto Univ, Inst Primate Res, Aichi 4848506, Japan
关键词
apology; cooperation; iterated prisoner's dilemma; punishment; signal;
D O I
10.1023/A:1011612522206
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
Recently, behaviors that seem to function as punishment or apology have been reported among non-human primates as well as humans. Such behaviors appear to play an important role in maintaining cooperation between individuals. Therefore, the evolution of these behaviors should be examined from the viewpoint of the evolution of cooperation. The iterated prisoner's dilemma (IPD) game is generally considered to be a standard model for the evolution of cooperation. In the present study, strategies accompanied by punishment-like attacks or apology-like behavior were introduced into the common IPD simulation. Punishment and apology were represented by the P signal and the AS signal given immediately after defection. A strategy with the P and AS signals, named the pPAS strategy, was proved to be an evolutionarily stable strategy under certain conditions. Numerical simulations were carried out according to different assigned values of the costs of punishment and apology. The simulations showed that pPAS could dominate the population (1) when the cost of giving P is relatively small, (2) when the cost of receiving P is relatively large, or (3) when the cost of giving AS is relatively large. The relative cost of giving AS had the clearest effect on the success of pPAS. pPAS can dominate the population even when a dominance asymmetry of the costs between two players was introduced. The present results suggest the possible evolution of social behaviors like punishment or apology as a means of maintaining cooperation.
引用
收藏
页码:703 / 720
页数:18
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Social Trends in the Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma
    Finocchiaro, Jessica
    Mathias, H. David
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2017 GENETIC AND EVOLUTIONARY COMPUTATION CONFERENCE COMPANION (GECCO'17 COMPANION), 2017, : 23 - 24
  • [32] Evolving Behaviors in the Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma
    Fogel, David B.
    EVOLUTIONARY COMPUTATION, 1993, 1 (01) : 77 - 97
  • [33] Invincible Strategies of Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma
    Wang, Shiheng
    Lin, Fangzhen
    AAMAS '19: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 18TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON AUTONOMOUS AGENTS AND MULTIAGENT SYSTEMS, 2019, : 2256 - 2258
  • [34] On the Relationship between the Duration of an Encounter and the Evolution of Cooperation in the Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma
    Fogel, David B.
    EVOLUTIONARY COMPUTATION, 1995, 3 (03) : 349 - 363
  • [35] Evolution of strategies in the three-person iterated prisoner's dilemma game
    Matsushima, M
    Ikegami, T
    JOURNAL OF THEORETICAL BIOLOGY, 1998, 195 (01) : 53 - 67
  • [36] Reinforcement and punishment in the prisoner's dilemma game
    Rachlin, H
    Brown, J
    Baker, F
    PSYCHOLOGY OF LEARNING AND MOTIVATION: ADVANCES IN RESEARCH AND THEORY, VOL 40, 2001, 40 : 327 - 364
  • [37] Overview of a Tarskian Solution to the Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma
    Foster, Christopher N.
    LOGICA YEARBOOK 2012, 2013, : 15 - 21
  • [38] Extending the iterated prisoner's dilemma without synchrony
    Hauert, C
    Schuster, HG
    JOURNAL OF THEORETICAL BIOLOGY, 1998, 192 (02) : 155 - 166
  • [39] Resolving the iterated prisoner's dilemma: theory and reality
    Raihani, N. J.
    Bshary, R.
    JOURNAL OF EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY, 2011, 24 (08) : 1628 - 1639
  • [40] The emergence of cooperation in asynchronous iterated prisoner's dilemma
    Cornforth, David
    Newth, David
    SIMULATED EVOLUTION AND LEARNING, PROCEEDINGS, 2006, 4247 : 742 - 749