Theory and Decision

, Volume 60, Issue 1, pp 69–111 | Cite as

The Evolution of Cooperative Strategies for Asymmetric Social Interactions

Article

Abstract

How can cooperation be achieved between self-interested individuals in commonly-occurring asymmetric interactions where agents have different positions? Should agents use the same strategies that are appropriate for symmetric social situations? We explore these questions through the asymmetric interaction captured in the indefinitely repeated investment game (IG). In every period of this game, the first player decides how much of an endowment he wants to invest, then this amount is tripled and passed to the second player, who finally decides how much of the tripled investment she wants to return to the first player. The results of three evolutionary studies demonstrate that the best-performing strategies for this asymmetric game differ from those for a similar but symmetric game, the indefinitely repeated Prisoner’s dilemma game. The strategies that enable cooperation for the asymmetric IG react more sensitively to exploitation, meaning that cooperation can more easily break down. Furthermore, once cooperation has stopped, it is much more difficult to reestablish than in symmetric situations. Based on these results, the presence of asymmetry in an interaction appears to be an important factor affecting adaptive behavior in these common social situations.

Keywords

bargaining evolutionary stable strategies finite state automata investment game repeated games 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abreu, D., Rubinstein, A. 1988The structure of Nash equilibrium in repeated games with finite automataEconometrica5612591281Google Scholar
  2. Aktipis, C. A. 2004When to walk away: contingent movement and the evolution of cooperationJournal of Theoretical Biology231249260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alexander, R. D. 1987The Biology of Moral SystemsAldine de GruyterNew YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Aumann, R. J. (1981), Survey of repeated games, In Essays in Game Theory and Mathematical Economic in Honor of Oskar Morgenstern, Bibliographisches Institut. Wissenschaftsverlag, Mannheim, pp. 11–42.Google Scholar
  5. Axelrod, R. 1984The Evolution of CooperationBasic BooksNew YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Axelrod, R. 1987

    The evolution of strategies in the iterated Prisoner’s dilemma

    Davis, L. eds. Genetic Algorithms: A Simulated AnnealingPitmanLondon3241
    Google Scholar
  7. Bendor, J., Swistak, P. 1998Evolutionary equilibria: characterization theorems and their implicationsTheory and Decision4599159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Berg, J., Dickhaut, J. W., McCabe, K. A. 1995Trust, reciprocity, and social historyGames and Economic Behavior10122142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Binmore, K. 1994Game Theory and the Social Contract. Volume 1 Playing fairMIT PressCambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  10. Binmore, K., Samuelson, L. 1992Evolutionary stability in repeated games played by finite automataJournal of Economic Theory57278305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Boyd, R. 1989Mistakes allow evolutionary stability in the repeated Prisoner’s dilemma gameJournal of Theoretical Biology1364756Google Scholar
  12. Boyd, R., Lorberbaum, J. P. 1987No pure strategy is evolutionarily stable in the repeated Prisoner’s dilemma gameNature3275859CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bugental, D. B. 2000Acquisition of the algorithms of social life: a domain-based approachPsychological Bulletin126187219Google Scholar
  14. Cohen, J. 1988Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral SciencesLawrence Erlbaum AssociatesHillsdale, NJGoogle Scholar
  15. Deutsch, M. 1975Equity, equality, and need: What determines which value will be used as the basis of distributive justice?Journal of Social Issues31137149Google Scholar
  16. Fehr, E., Gächter, S., Kirchsteiger, G. 1997Reciprocity as a contract enforcement device: Experimental evidenceEconometrica65833860Google Scholar
  17. Fiske, A. P. 1992The four elementary forms of sociality: framework for a unified theory of social relationsPsychological Review99689723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fudenberg, D., Tirole, J. 1991Game TheoryMIT PressCambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  19. Goldberg, D. E. 1989Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization, and Machine LearningAddison-WesleyReading, MAGoogle Scholar
  20. Goldberg, D. E., Deb, K. 1991

    A comparison of selection schemes used in genetic algorithms

    Rawlins, G.J.E. eds. Foundations of Genetic AlgorithmsMorgan KaufmannSan Mateo, CA6993
    Google Scholar
  21. Güth, W., Kliemt, H. 2000Evolutionarily stable co-operative commitmentsTheory and Decision49197221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Güth, W., Ockenfels, P., Wendel, M. 1997Cooperation based on trust. An experimental investigationJournal of Economic Psychology181543Google Scholar
  23. Güth, W., Schmittberger, R., Schwarz, R. 1982An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargainingJournal of Economic Behavior and Organization3367388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hirschfeld, L. A.Gelman, S. A. eds. 1994Mapping the Mind: Domain Specificity in Cognition and CultureCambridge University PressNew YorkGoogle Scholar
  25. Hoffmann, R. 1999The independent localisations of interaction and learning in the repeated Prisoner’s DilemmaTheory and Decision475772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hoffmann, R. 2001The ecology of cooperationTheory and Decision50101118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hopcroft, J. E., Ullman, J. D. 1979Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages, and ComputationAddison-WesleyReading, MAGoogle Scholar
  28. Kraines, D., Kraines, V. 1993Learning to cooperate with Pavlov: an adaptive strategy for the iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma with noiseTheory and Decision35107150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kraines, D., Kraines, V. 1995Evolution of learning among Pavlov strategies in a competitive environment with noiseJournal of Conflict Resolution39439466Google Scholar
  30. Ledyard, J. O. 1995

    Public goods: a survey of experimental results

    Kagel, J. H.Roth, A. E. eds. The Handbook of Experimental EconomicsPrinceton University PressPrinceton, NJ111194
    Google Scholar
  31. Leimar, O. 1997Repeated games: a state space approachJournal of Theoretical Biology184471498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lindgren, K. 1991

    Evolutionary phenomena in simple dynamics

    Langton, C. G.Taylor, C.Farmer, J. D.Rasmussen, S. eds. Artificial Life IIAddison-WesleyReading, MA295312
    Google Scholar
  33. Linster, B. G. 1992Evolutionary stability in the infinitely repeated Prisoner’s dilemma played by two-state Moore machinesSouthern Economic Journal58880903Google Scholar
  34. Lorberbaum, J. 1994No strategy is evolutionarily stable in the repeated Prisoner’s dilemmaJournal of Theoretical Biology168117130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Luce, R. D., Raiffa, H. 1957Games and DecisionWileyNew YorkGoogle Scholar
  36. Marinoff, L. 1990The inapplicability of evolutionarily stable strategy to the Prisoner’s dilemmaBritish Journal of Philosophy of Science41461472Google Scholar
  37. Maynard Smith, J. 1984Game theory and the evolution of behaviourBehavioral and Brain Sciences795125Google Scholar
  38. Maynard Smith, J., Price, G. R. 1973The logic of animal conflictNature2461518Google Scholar
  39. Michalewicy, Z. 1996Genetic Algorithms + Data Structures = Evolution Programs3SpringerBerlinGoogle Scholar
  40. Mitchell, M. 1996An Introduction to Genetic AlgorithmsMIT PressCambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  41. Nelson, R. J. 1975Behaviorism, finite automata, and stimulus theoryTheory and Decision6249267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Nowak, M. A., May, R. M. 1992Evolutionary games and spatial chaosNature359826829CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Nowak, M. A., Sigmund, K. 1993A strategy of win-stay, lose-shift that outperforms tit-for-tat in the Prisoner’s Dilemma gameNature3645658CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Nowak, M. A., Sigmund, K. 1994The alternating Prisoner’s DilemmaJournal of Theoretical Biology168219326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Ochs, J., Roth, A. 1989An experimental study of sequential bargainingAmerican Economic Review79355384Google Scholar
  46. Rieskamp, J. and Gigerenzer, G. (2005), Heutistics for social interaction: How to generate trust and fairness. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  47. Samuelson, L. 1991Limit evolutionarily stable strategies in two-player, normal form gamesGames and Economic Behavior3110128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Samuelson, L. 1997Evolutionary Games and Equilibrium SelectionMIT PressCambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  49. Schelling, T. C. 1960The Strategy of ConflictHarvard University PressCambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  50. Selten, R. 1983Evolutionary stability in extensive two-person gamesMathematical Social Sciences5269363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Selten, R. 1988Evolutionary stability in extensive two-person games—Correction and further developmentMathematical Social Sciences16223266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Sober, E. 1992Stable cooperation in iterated Prisoner’s DilemmasEconomics and Philosophy8127139Google Scholar
  53. Sugden, R. 1986The Economics of Rights, Cooperation, and WelfareBasil BlackwellOxfordGoogle Scholar
  54. Suppes, P. 1969Stimulus-response theory of finite automataJournal of Mathematical Psychology6327355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Trivers, R. L. 1971The evolution of reciprocal altruismThe Quarterly Review of Biology463557Google Scholar
  56. Huyck, J. B., Battalio, R. C., Walters, M. F. 1995Commitment versus discretion in the peasant-dictator gameGames and Economic Behavior10143170Google Scholar
  57. Weibull, J. W. 1995Evolutionary Game TheoryMIT PressCambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  58. Young, H. P., Foster, D. 1991Cooperation in the short and in the long runGames and Economic Behavior3145156Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Max Planck Institute for Human DevelopmentBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations