Community connectivity and heterogeneity: clues and insights on cooperation on social networks

  • Sergi Lozano
  • Alex Arenas
  • Angel Sánchez
Regular Article


While studies on the emergence of cooperation on structured populations abound, only few of them have considered real social networks as the substrate on which individuals interact. As has been shown recently [Lozano et al., PLoS ONE 3(4):e1892, 2008], understanding cooperative behavior on social networks requires knowledge not only of their global (macroscopic) characteristic, but also a deep insight on their community (mesoscopic) structure. In this paper, we look at this problem from the viewpoint of the resilience of cooperation, in particular when there are directed exogenous attacks (insertion of pure defectors) at key locations in the network. We present results of agent-based simulations showing strong evidence that the resilience of social networks is crucially dependent on their community structure, ranging from no resilience to robust cooperative behavior. Our results have important implications for the understanding of how organizations work and can be used as a guide for organization design.


Cooperation Social networks Community structure Resilience Prisoner’s dilemma 

JEL Classification

C72 C73 L2 M54 


  1. Albert R, Jeong H, Barabási A-L (2000) Error and attack tolerance of complex networks. Nature 406: 378–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Axelrod R (1984) The evolution of cooperation. Penguin, LondonGoogle Scholar
  3. Axelrod R, Hamilton WD (1981) The evolution of cooperation. Science 211: 1390–1396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boguñá M, Pastor-Satorras R, Díaz-Guilera A, Arenas A (2004) Models of social networks based on social distance attachment. Phys Rev E 70: 056122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Burt RS (1995) Structural holes: the social structure of competition, paper back edition. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  6. Camerer C (2003) Behavioral game theory: experiments in strategic interaction. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  7. Chalub F, Santos FC, Pacheco JM (2006) The evolution of norms. J Theor Biol 241: 233–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chesbrough H (2003) Open innovation: the new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Harvard Business School Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  9. Crespi BJ (2001) The evolution of social behavior in microorganisms. Trends Ecol Evol 16: 178–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Danon L, Arenas A, Díaz-Guilera A (2008) Impact of community structure on information transfer. Phys Rev E 77: 036103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Duch J, Arenas A (2005) Community detection in complex networks using extremal optimization. Phys Rev E 72: 027104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fontoura Costa L (2004) Reinforcing the resilience of complex networks. Phys Rev E 69: 066127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Granovetter M (1973) The strength of weak ties. Am J Soc 78: 1360–1380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Guimerá R, Danon L, Díaz-Guilera A, Giralt F, Arenas A (2003) Self-similar community structure in a network of human interactions. Phys Rev E 68: 065103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. György S, Gábor F (2007) Evolutionary games on graphs. Phys Rep 446: 97–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kaza S, Xu J, Chen H (2005) Topological analysis of criminal activity networks in multiple jurisdictions. In: The National Conference on Digital Government Research, Atlanta, GAGoogle Scholar
  17. Lozano S, Arenas A (2007) A model to test how diversity affects resilience in regional innovation networks. J Artif Soc Social Sim 10(4):8. Google Scholar
  18. Lozano S, Arenas A, Sánchez A (2008) Mesoscopic structure conditions the emergence of cooperation on social networks. PLoS ONE 3(4):e1892. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0001892
  19. Newman MEJ (2003) The structure and function of complex networks. SIAM Rev 45: 167–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Nowak MA (2006) Five rules for the evolution of cooperation. Science 314: 1560–1563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Nowak MA, May RM (1992) Evolutionary games and spatial chaos. Nature 359: 826–829CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Poncela J, Gardenes JG, Floria LM, Moreno Y (2007) Robustness of cooperation in the evolutionary prisoner’s dilemma on complex networks. New J Phys 9: 184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sagara H, Tanimoto J (2007) Analysis of impact of communication among different norms in norm reputation model. In: Proc. 11th Asia-Pacific Workshop on Intelligent Evolutionary Systems (CD-ROM)Google Scholar
  24. Santos FC, Pacheco JM, Lenaerts T (2006) Evolutionary dynamics of social dilemmas in structured heterogeneous populations. Proc Natl Acad Sci 103: 3490–3494CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sugden R (2004) Economics of rights, co-operation and welfare, 2nd edn. Palgrave Macmillan, HampshireGoogle Scholar
  26. Wasserman S, Faust K (1994) Social network analysis: methods and applications. Cambridge University, CambridgeGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ETH ZurichSwiss Federal Institute of TechnologyZurichSwitzerland
  2. 2.Universitat Rovira i VirgiliTarragonaSpain
  3. 3.Instituto de Biocomputación y Física de Sistemas Complejos (BIFI)Universidad de ZaragozaZaragozaSpain
  4. 4.Grupo Interdisciplinar de Sistemas Complejos (GISC), Departamento de MatemáticasUniversidad Carlos III de MadridLeganésSpain
  5. 5.Instituto de Ciencias Matemáticas CSIC-UAM-UC3M-UCMMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations