Effect of voluntary participation on an alternating and a simultaneous prisoner's dilemma

Individuals reciprocate negative actions revealing negative upstream reciprocity

Indirect reciprocity is widely recognized as a mechanism for explaining cooperation and can be divided into two sub-concepts: downstream and upstream reciprocity. Downstream reciprocity is supported by reputation; if someone sees you helping someone else, the person who sees this will think higher of you, and you will be more likely to be helped. Upstream reciprocity is helping someone because you are being helped by somebody else, which often happens in everyday life and experimental games. This paper focuses on the behavior of "take" and examines negative upstream reciprocity using an upstream reciprocity framework. The term "take" is defined as "to steal rather than give resources to others." "If something is taken from you, do you take from others?" is an important extension for indirect reciprocity research; subsequently, this paper discusses experiments conducted on whether negative upstream reciprocity is chained and what causes it. The results demonstrated differences between positive and negative upstream reciprocity. In analyzing the data of nearly 600 participants to determine the extent to which negative upstream reciprocity is observed and the causes of negative upstream reciprocity, the study found that If individual A takes resources from individual B, then B is more likely to take resources from a third-party, individual C. Notably, some causes of positive upstream reciprocity were found to have no effect or the opposite effect on negative upstream reciprocity. The results also demonstrate that the first person to take can cause a chain reaction. This paper demonstrates the importance of the first person not taking from someone else and suggests the need to consider various behavioral options for future research on cooperation.

Evolutionary dynamics of the delayed replicator-mutator equation: Limit cycle and cooperation

Game theory deals with strategic interactions among players and evolutionary game dynamics tracks the fate of the players' populations under selection. In this paper, we consider the replicator equation for two-player-two-strategy games involving cooperators and defectors. We modify the equation to include the effect of mutation and also delay that corresponds either to the delayed information about the population state or in realizing the effect of interaction among players. By focusing on the four exhaustive classes of symmetrical games-the Stag Hunt game, the Snowdrift game, the Prisoners' Dilemma game, and the Harmony game-we analytically and numerically analyze the delayed replicator-mutator equation to find the explicit condition for the Hopf bifurcation bringing forth stable limit cycle. The existence of the asymptotically stable limit cycle imply the coexistence of the cooperators and the defectors; and in the games, where defection is a stable Nash strategy, a stable limit cycle does provide a mechanism for evolution of cooperation. We find that while mutation alone can never lead to oscillatory cooperation state in two-player-two-strategy games, the delay can change the scenario. On the other hand, there are situations when delay alone cannot lead to the Hopf bifurcation in the absence of mutation in the selection dynamics.