Paper detail

Assortment and Reciprocity Mechanisms for Promotion of Cooperation in a Model of Multilevel Selection

In the study of the evolution of cooperation, many mechanisms have been proposed to help overcome the self-interested cheating that is individually optimal in the Prisoners' Dilemma game. These mechanisms include assortative or networked social interactions, other-regarding preferences considering the payoffs of others, reciprocity rules to establish cooperation as a social norm, and multilevel selection involving simultaneous competition between individuals favoring cheaters and competition between groups favoring cooperators. In this paper, we build on recent work studying PDE replicator equations for multilevel selection to understand how within-group mechanisms of assortment, other-regarding preferences, and both direct and indirect reciprocity can help to facilitate cooperation in concert with evolutionary competition between groups. We consider a group-structured population in which interactions between individuals consist of Prisoners' Dilemma games, and study the dynamics of multilevel competition determined by the payoffs individuals receive when interacting according to these within-group mechanisms. We find that the presence of each of these mechanisms acts synergistically with multilevel selection for the promotion of cooperation, decreasing the strength of between-group competition required to sustain long-time cooperation and increasing the collective payoff achieved by the population. However, we find that only other-regarding preferences allows for the achievement of socially optimal collective payoffs for Prisoners' Dilemma games in which average payoff is maximized by an intermediate mix of cooperators and defectors. For the other three mechanisms, the multilevel dynamics remain susceptible to a shadow of lower-level selection, as the collective outcome fails to exceed the payoff of the all-cooperator group.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.