IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/phsmap/v388y2009i17p3581-3584.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

To cooperate or to defect? Altruism and reputation

Author

Listed:
  • Kułakowski, Krzysztof
  • Gawroński, Przemysław

Abstract

The basic difficulty in cooperation theory is to justify the cooperation. Here we propose a new approach, where players are driven by their altruism to cooperate or not. The probability of cooperation depends also on the co-player’s reputation. We find that players with positive altruism cooperate and meet cooperation. In this approach, payoffs are not relevant.

Suggested Citation

  • Kułakowski, Krzysztof & Gawroński, Przemysław, 2009. "To cooperate or to defect? Altruism and reputation," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 388(17), pages 3581-3584.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:phsmap:v:388:y:2009:i:17:p:3581-3584
    DOI: 10.1016/j.physa.2009.05.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378437109003677
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only. Journal offers the option of making the article available online on Science direct for a fee of $3,000
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.physa.2009.05.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David K. Levine, 1998. "Modeling Altruism and Spitefulness in Experiment," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 1(3), pages 593-622, July.
    2. Ernst Fehr & Simon Gächter, 2002. "Altruistic punishment in humans," Nature, Nature, vol. 415(6868), pages 137-140, January.
    3. Martin A. Nowak & Karl Sigmund, 1998. "Evolution of indirect reciprocity by image scoring," Nature, Nature, vol. 393(6685), pages 573-577, June.
    4. M.A. Nowak & K. Sigmund, 1998. "Evolution of Indirect Reciprocity by Image Scoring/ The Dynamics of Indirect Reciprocity," Working Papers ir98040, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ernst Fehr & Urs Fischbacher, 2004. "Social norms and human cooperation," Macroeconomics 0409026, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Podobnik, Boris & Gabor, Andrijana Musura & Kirbis, Ivona Skreblin, 2019. "Scale-free growth of human society based on cooperation and altruistic punishment," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 513(C), pages 613-619.
    3. Wubben, Maarten J.J. & Cremer, David De & Dijk, Eric van, 2011. "The communication of anger and disappointment helps to establish cooperation through indirect reciprocity," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 489-501, June.
    4. Cubitt, Robin P. & Drouvelis, Michalis & Gächter, Simon & Kabalin, Ruslan, 2011. "Moral judgments in social dilemmas: How bad is free riding?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 253-264.
    5. Ben-Ner, Avner & Putterman, Louis & Kong, Fanmin & Magan, Dan, 2004. "Reciprocity in a two-part dictator game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 333-352, March.
    6. Lu, Wen & Liang, Shu, 2023. "Direct emotional interaction in prisoner's dilemma game," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 458(C).
    7. Gary Bolton & Axel Ockenfels, 2005. "A stress test of fairness measures in models of social utility," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 25(4), pages 957-982, June.
    8. Brosnan, Sarah F., 2011. "An evolutionary perspective on morality," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 23-30, January.
    9. Feng, Sinan & Liu, Xuesong & Dong, Yida, 2022. "Limited punishment pool may promote cooperation in the public goods game," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 165(P2).
    10. Bogliacino, Francesco & Codagnone, Cristiano, 2021. "Microfoundations, behaviour, and evolution: Evidence from experiments," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 372-385.
    11. Si, Zehua & He, Zhixue & Shen, Chen & Tanimoto, Jun, 2023. "Speculative defectors as unexpected insulators of super cooperators in structured populations," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    12. Chang, Shuhua & Zhang, Zhipeng & Wu, Yu’e & Xie, Yunya, 2018. "Cooperation is enhanced by inhomogeneous inertia in spatial prisoner’s dilemma game," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 490(C), pages 419-425.
    13. Giangiacomo Bravo & Lucia Tamburino, 2008. "The Evolution of Trust in Non-Simultaneous Exchange Situations," Rationality and Society, , vol. 20(1), pages 85-113, February.
    14. Servátka, Maros, 2010. "Does generosity generate generosity? An experimental study of reputation effects in a dictator game," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 11-17, January.
    15. Engelmann, Dirk & Fischbacher, Urs, 2009. "Indirect reciprocity and strategic reputation building in an experimental helping game," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 399-407, November.
    16. Egas, Martijn & Riedl, Arno, 2005. "The Economics of Altruistic Punishment and the Demise of Cooperation," IZA Discussion Papers 1646, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Wolff, Irenaeus, 2009. "Counterpunishment revisited: an evolutionary approach," MPRA Paper 16923, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Zhu, Wenqiang & Pan, Qiuhui & Song, Sha & He, Mingfeng, 2023. "Effects of exposure-based reward and punishment on the evolution of cooperation in prisoner’s dilemma game," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    19. Haruto Takagishi & Michiko Koizumi & Takayuki Fujii & Joanna Schug & Shinya Kameshima & Toshio Yamagishi, 2014. "The Role of Cognitive and Emotional Perspective Taking in Economic Decision Making in the Ultimatum Game," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(9), pages 1-7, September.
    20. Misato Inaba & Nobuyuki Takahashi, 2019. "Linkage Based on the Kandori Norm Successfully Sustains Cooperation in Social Dilemmas," Games, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-15, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:phsmap:v:388:y:2009:i:17:p:3581-3584. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/physica-a-statistical-mechpplications/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.