IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jgames/v10y2019i1p4-d197520.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When and How Does Mutation-Generated Variation Promote the Evolution of Cooperation?

Author

Listed:
  • Mathias Spichtig

    (Institute for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Dynamics, University of Amsterdam, P.O. Box 94240, 1090GE Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

  • Martijn Egas

    (Institute for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Dynamics, University of Amsterdam, P.O. Box 94240, 1090GE Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

Abstract

Mutation-generated variation in behavior is thought to promote the evolution of cooperation. Here, we study this by distinguishing two effects of mutation in evolutionary games of the finitely repeated Prisoner’s Dilemma in infinite asexual populations. First, we show how cooperation can evolve through the direct effect of mutation, i.e., the fitness impact that individuals experience from interactions with mutants before selection acts upon these mutants. Whereas this direct effect suffices to explain earlier findings, we question its generality because mutational variation usually generates the highest direct fitness impact on unconditional defectors ( AllD ). We identify special conditions (e.g., intermediate mutation rates) for which cooperation can be favored by an indirect effect of mutation, i.e., the fitness impact that individuals experience from interactions with descendants of mutants. Simulations confirm that AllD -dominated populations can be invaded by cooperative strategies despite the positive direct effect of mutation on AllD . Thus, here the indirect effect of mutation drives the evolution of cooperation. The higher level of cooperation, however, is not achieved by individuals triggering reciprocity (‘genuine cooperation’), but by individuals exploiting the willingness of others to cooperate (‘exploitative cooperation’). Our distinction between direct and indirect effects of mutation provides a new perspective on how mutation-generated variation alters frequency-dependent selection.

Suggested Citation

  • Mathias Spichtig & Martijn Egas, 2019. "When and How Does Mutation-Generated Variation Promote the Evolution of Cooperation?," Games, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-17, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jgames:v:10:y:2019:i:1:p:4-:d:197520
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4336/10/1/4/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4336/10/1/4/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John M. McNamara & Zoltan Barta & Lutz Fromhage & Alasdair I. Houston, 2008. "The coevolution of choosiness and cooperation," Nature, Nature, vol. 451(7175), pages 189-192, January.
    2. Fischbacher, Urs & Gachter, Simon & Fehr, Ernst, 2001. "Are people conditionally cooperative? Evidence from a public goods experiment," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 71(3), pages 397-404, June.
    3. Tim Clutton-Brock, 2009. "Cooperation between non-kin in animal societies," Nature, Nature, vol. 462(7269), pages 51-57, November.
    4. Cressman, R., 1996. "Evolutionary Stability in the Finitely Repeated Prisoner 's Dilemma Game," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 234-248, January.
    5. Simon D Angus & Jonathan Newton, 2015. "Emergence of Shared Intentionality Is Coupled to the Advance of Cumulative Culture," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-12, October.
    6. Jonathan Newton, 2018. "Evolutionary Game Theory: A Renaissance," Games, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-67, May.
    7. Newton, Jonathan, 2017. "Shared intentions: The evolution of collaboration," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 517-534.
    8. van Veelen, Matthijs, 2012. "Robustness against indirect invasions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 382-393.
    9. Nachbar, John H., 1992. "Evolution in the finitely repeated prisoner's dilemma," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 307-326, December.
    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. Newton, Jonathan & Sercombe, Damian, 2020. "Agency, potential and contagion," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 79-97.
    2. Rusch, Hannes, 2019. "The evolution of collaboration in symmetric 2×2-games with imperfect recognition of types," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 118-127.
    3. Jonathan Newton, 2018. "Evolutionary Game Theory: A Renaissance," Games, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-67, May.
    4. Simon D Angus & Jonathan Newton, 2020. "Collaboration leads to cooperation on sparse networks," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(1), pages 1-11, January.
    5. García, Julián & van Veelen, Matthijs, 2016. "In and out of equilibrium I: Evolution of strategies in repeated games with discounting," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 161-189.
    6. Christopher Graser & Takako Fujiwara-Greve & Julian García & Matthijs van Veelen, 2024. "Repeated games with partner choice," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 24-038/I, Tinbergen Institute.
    7. Yangbo Song & Mofei Zhao, 2023. "Cooperative teaching and learning of actions," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 76(4), pages 1289-1327, November.
    8. Newton, Jonathan & Wait, Andrew & Angus, Simon D., 2019. "Watercooler chat, organizational structure and corporate culture," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 354-365.
    9. Saral, Ali Seyhun, 2020. "Evolution of Conditional Cooperation in Prisoner's Dilemma," OSF Preprints wcpkz, Center for Open Science.
    10. Hwang, Sung-Ha & Lim, Wooyoung & Neary, Philip & Newton, Jonathan, 2018. "Conventional contracts, intentional behavior and logit choice: Equality without symmetry," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 273-294.
    11. Benjamin M Zagorsky & Johannes G Reiter & Krishnendu Chatterjee & Martin A Nowak, 2013. "Forgiver Triumphs in Alternating Prisoner's Dilemma," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(12), pages 1-8, December.
    12. Sandholm, William H., 2015. "Population Games and Deterministic Evolutionary Dynamics," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,, Elsevier.
    13. Lindgren, Kristian & Verendel, Vilhelm, 2013. "Evolutionary Exploration of the Finitely Repeated Prisoners' Dilemma--The Effect of Out-of-Equilibrium Play," MPRA Paper 43662, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Izquierdo, Luis R. & Izquierdo, Segismundo S. & Sandholm, William H., 2019. "An introduction to ABED: Agent-based simulation of evolutionary game dynamics," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 434-462.
    15. Izquierdo, Luis R. & Izquierdo, Segismundo S. & Vega-Redondo, Fernando, 2014. "Leave and let leave: A sufficient condition to explain the evolutionary emergence of cooperation," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 91-113.
    16. Khalil, Elias L., 2020. "The isomorphism hypothesis: The prisoner's dilemma as intertemporal allocation, and vice versa," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 735-746.
    17. Eleonora Herrera-Medina & Antoni Riera Font, 2023. "A Multiagent Game Theoretic Simulation of Public Policy Coordination through Collaboration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-20, August.
    18. Nax, Heinrich Harald & Newton, Jonathan, 2022. "Deep and shallow thinking in the long run," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 17(4), November.
    19. Robin Watson & Thomas J. H. Morgan & Rachel L. Kendal & Julie Van de Vyver & Jeremy Kendal, 2021. "Social Learning Strategies and Cooperative Behaviour: Evidence of Payoff Bias, but Not Prestige or Conformity, in a Social Dilemma Game," Games, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-26, November.
    20. Damien Francey & Ralph Bergmüller, 2012. "Images of Eyes Enhance Investments in a Real-Life Public Good," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(5), pages 1-7, May.

    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:gam:jgames:v:10:y:2019:i:1:p:4-:d:197520. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.