It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
To avoid exploitation by defectors, people can use past experiences with others when deciding to cooperate or not (‘private information’). Alternatively, people can derive others’ reputation from ‘public’ information provided by individuals within the social network. However, public information may be aligned or misaligned with one’s own private experiences and different individuals, such as ‘friends’ and ‘enemies’, may have different opinions about the reputation of others. Using evolutionary agent-based simulations, we examine how cooperation and social organization is shaped when agents (1) prioritize private or public information about others’ reputation, and (2) integrate others’ opinions using a friend-focused or a friend-and-enemy focused heuristic (relying on reputation information from only friends or also enemies, respectively). When agents prioritize public information and rely on friend-and-enemy heuristics, we observe polarization cycles marked by high cooperation, invasion by defectors, and subsequent population fragmentation. Prioritizing private information diminishes polarization and defector invasions, but also results in limited cooperation. Only when using friend-focused heuristics and following past experiences or the recommendation of friends create prosperous and stable populations based on cooperation. These results show how combining one’s own experiences and the opinions of friends can lead to stable and large-scale cooperation and highlight the important role of following the advice of friends in the evolution of group cooperation.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Department of Physics, Informatics and Mathematics, Modena, Italy (GRID:grid.7548.e) (ISNI:0000 0001 2169 7570)
2 Advanced Institute of Big Data, Department of Big Data Intelligence, Beijing, China (GRID:grid.7548.e)
3 University of Groningen, Faculty of Behavioral and Social Sciences, Groningen, The Netherlands (GRID:grid.4830.f) (ISNI:0000 0004 0407 1981); University of Groningen, Faculty of Economics and Business, Groningen, The Netherlands (GRID:grid.4830.f) (ISNI:0000 0004 0407 1981); Leibniz Institute for Primate Research, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology Unit, German Primate Center, Göttingen, Germany (GRID:grid.418215.b) (ISNI:0000 0000 8502 7018)
4 University of Zurich, Department of Psychology, Zurich, Switzerland (GRID:grid.7400.3) (ISNI:0000 0004 1937 0650)