Evolution of Cooperation in E-commerce Based on Prisoner’s Dilemma Game

  • Jalal Eddine BahbouhiEmail author
  • Najem Moussa
Conference paper
Part of the Learning and Analytics in Intelligent Systems book series (LAIS, volume 7)


Electronic commerce transactions often occur between strangers. Without any information about theirs counterparts, individuals feel puzzled to continue in transactions. Game theorists have formalized this problem as a prisoner’s dilemma and predict mutual noncooperation between sellers and vendors. This study investigates how failure in transactions between individuals affects electronic commerce exchanges and empower successful transactions between participants. For this purpose, we study the evolutionary prisoner’s dilemma game (PDG) on scale-free networks and analyze the effect of failure. Individuals are represented by agents located on a vertices of a graph, whose edges define the network of contacts between those players. With the aid of the analysis of the PDG on a graph, we are able to investigate intuitively how the failure affects the transformation of individuals’ strategies. We find that the failure makes important changes in the structure of the graph, which induces considerable variation in the level of cooperation. As a result, our results show that failure inhibits the emergence and sustainment of the cooperation.


Electronic commerce Evolution of cooperation Prisoner’s Dilemma Scale-free network 


  1. 1.
    Yamamoto, H., Ishida, K., Ohta, T.: Modeling reputation management system on online C2C market. Comput. Math. Organ. Theor. 10(2), 165–178 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Strader, T.J., Ramaswami, S.N.: The value of seller trustworthiness in C2C online markets. Commun. ACM 45(12), 45–49 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Huang, Y., Wang, M.: Credit rating system in C2C e-commerce: verification and improvement of existent systems with game theory. In: 2009 International Conference on Management of e-Commerce and e-Government, pp. 36–39. IEEE, September 2009Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bahbouhi, J.E., Moussa, N.: Prisoner’s dilemma game model for e-commerce. Appl. Math. Comput. 292, 128–144 (2017)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kim, Y., Peterson, R.A.: A meta-analysis of online trust relationships in e-commerce. J. Interact. Mark. 38, 44–54 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Oliveira, T., Alhinho, M., Rita, P., Dhillon, G.: Modelling and testing consumer trust dimensions in e-commerce. Comput. Hum. Behav. 71, 153–164 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nowak, M.A., Sigmund, K.: Evolution of indirect reciprocity. Nature 437(7063), 1291–1298 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dugatkin, L.A., Mestertongibbons, M.: Cooperation among unrelated individuals: reciprocal altruism, by-product mutualism and group selection in fishes. Biosystems 37(1–2), 19–30 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Perc, M., Szolnoki, A.: Self-organization of punishment in structured populations. New J. Phys. 14(4), 43013–43025 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Szolnoki, A., Perc, M.: Effectiveness of conditional punishment for the evolution of public cooperation. J. Theoret. Biol. 325(10), 34–41 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Santos, F.C., Pacheco, J.M.: Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 098104 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Szabó, G., Tőke, C.: Evolutionary prisoner’s dilemma game on a square lattice. Phys. Rev. E 58(1), 69 (1998) CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.LAROSERI, Department of Computer Science, Faculty of SciencesUniversity of Chouaib DoukkaliEL JadidaMorocco

Personalised recommendations