A solution for private assessment in indirect reciprocity using solitary observation.

Although indirect reciprocity is a fundamental mechanism in the evolution of human cooperation, most studies assume public assessment in which individuals are not permitted to obtain private assessments of others. Existing studies on private assessment have used individual-based simulations because of the analytical difficulty involved. Here, we develop an analytical method using solitary observation to solve private assessment in indirect reciprocity problem without any approximation. In this study, we formulate a model of solitary observation and calculate the replicator dynamics systems of five leading norms of indirect reciprocity. Indirect reciprocity in private assessment provides a different result to that in public assessment. According to the existence proofs of cooperative evolutionarily stable (CES) points in the system, strict norms (stern judging and shunning) have no CES point in private assessment, while they do in public assessment. Image scoring does not change the system regardless of the assessment types because it does not use second-order information. In tolerant norms (simple standing and staying), the CES points move to co-existence of norms and unconditional cooperators. Despite the fact that there is no central coercive assessment system in private assessment, the average cooperation rate at the CES points in private assessment is greater than that in public assessment. This is because private assessment gives unconditional cooperators a role. Our results also show the superiority of the staying norm. Compared with simple standing, staying has three advantages in private assessment: a higher cooperation rate, easiness of invasion into defectors, and robustness to maintain cooperative evolutionarily stable situations. Our results are applicable to general social dilemmas in relation to private information. Under some dilemmas, norms or assessment rules should be carefully chosen to enable cooperation to evolve.

[1]  Francisco C. Santos,et al.  Evolution of cooperation under indirect reciprocity and arbitrary exploration rates , 2016, Scientific Reports.

[2]  Karl Sigmund,et al.  The competition of assessment rules for indirect reciprocity. , 2010, Journal of theoretical biology.

[3]  M. Nowak,et al.  Evolution of indirect reciprocity by image scoring , 1998, Nature.

[4]  Karl Sigmund,et al.  Moral assessment in indirect reciprocity , 2012, Journal of theoretical biology.

[5]  Isamu Okada,et al.  Indirect reciprocity can overcome free-rider problems on costly moral assessment , 2016, Biology Letters.

[6]  Shinsuke Suzuki,et al.  Indirect reciprocity is sensitive to costs of information transfer , 2013, Scientific Reports.

[7]  M. Nowak,et al.  Evolution of indirect reciprocity , 2005, Nature.

[8]  Karthik Panchanathan,et al.  A tale of two defectors: the importance of standing for evolution of indirect reciprocity. , 2003, Journal of theoretical biology.

[9]  A. Ule,et al.  Reputation-based cooperation: empirical evidence for behavioral strategies , 2016 .

[10]  D. Tracer,et al.  Social image concerns promote cooperation more than altruistic punishment , 2016, Nature Communications.

[11]  M. Milinski,et al.  Cooperation through image scoring in humans. , 2000, Science.

[12]  Karl Sigmund,et al.  The good, the bad and the discriminator--errors in direct and indirect reciprocity. , 2006, Journal of theoretical biology.

[13]  Tatsuya Sasaki,et al.  Effect of assessment error and private information on stern-judging in indirect reciprocity , 2013, ArXiv.

[14]  F. C. Santos,et al.  The evolution of norms. , 2006, Journal of theoretical biology.

[15]  R. Boyd,et al.  Indirect reciprocity can stabilize cooperation without the second-order free rider problem , 2004, Nature.

[16]  O. Leimar,et al.  Evolution of cooperation through indirect reciprocity , 2001, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[17]  M. Milinski,et al.  Reputation helps solve the ‘tragedy of the commons’ , 2002, Nature.

[18]  Tatsuya Sasaki,et al.  A norm knockout method on indirect reciprocity to reveal indispensable norms , 2017, Scientific Reports.

[19]  Dirk Semmann,et al.  Gossip as an alternative for direct observation in games of indirect reciprocity , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[20]  Yoh Iwasa,et al.  Global analyses of evolutionary dynamics and exhaustive search for social norms that maintain cooperation by reputation. , 2007, Journal of theoretical biology.

[21]  Martin A. Nowak,et al.  Indirect reciprocity provides a narrow margin of efficiency for costly punishment , 2008, Nature.

[22]  Luis A. Martinez-Vaquero,et al.  Evolutionary stability and resistance to cheating in an indirect reciprocity model based on reputation. , 2013, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[23]  Michihiro Kandori Social Norms and Community Enforcement , 1992 .

[24]  Y. Nakai,et al.  Tolerant indirect reciprocity can boost social welfare through solidarity with unconditional cooperators in private monitoring , 2017, Scientific Reports.

[25]  Y. Miyashita,et al.  Two distinct neural mechanisms underlying indirect reciprocity , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[26]  Martin A. Nowak,et al.  Indirect Reciprocity with Optional Interactions and Private Information , 2015, Games.

[27]  John M McNamara,et al.  Reputation can enhance or suppress cooperation through positive feedback , 2015, Nature Communications.

[28]  Karl Sigmund,et al.  The logic of reprobation: assessment and action rules for indirect reciprocation. , 2004, Journal of theoretical biology.

[29]  Martin A Nowak,et al.  Indirect reciprocity with optional interactions. , 2015, Journal of theoretical biology.

[30]  K. Sigmund The Calculus of Selfishness , 2010 .

[31]  Karthik Panchanathan,et al.  Two wrongs don't make a right: the initial viability of different assessment rules in the evolution of indirect reciprocity. , 2011, Journal of theoretical biology.

[32]  Yoh Iwasa,et al.  How should we define goodness?--reputation dynamics in indirect reciprocity. , 2004, Journal of theoretical biology.

[33]  Martin A. Nowak,et al.  Reputation Effects in Public and Private Interactions , 2015, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[34]  Naoki Masuda,et al.  Tag-based indirect reciprocity by incomplete social information , 2007, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[35]  Yutaka Nakai,et al.  Emergence and Collapse of Peace with Friend Selection Strategies , 2008, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul..

[36]  Francisco C. Santos,et al.  Stern-Judging: A Simple, Successful Norm Which Promotes Cooperation under Indirect Reciprocity , 2006, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[37]  Michael A Fishman,et al.  Indirect reciprocity among imperfect individuals. , 2003, Journal of theoretical biology.

[38]  Satoshi Uchida,et al.  Effect of private information on indirect reciprocity. , 2010, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[39]  Josef Hofbauer,et al.  Evolutionary Games and Population Dynamics , 1998 .

[40]  M. Milinski,et al.  Cooperation through indirect reciprocity: image scoring or standing strategy? , 2001, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[41]  M A Nowak,et al.  The dynamics of indirect reciprocity. , 1998, Journal of theoretical biology.

[42]  Tatsuya Sasaki,et al.  The evolution of conditional moral assessment in indirect reciprocity , 2016, Scientific Reports.

[43]  Bettina Rockenbach,et al.  The efficient interaction of indirect reciprocity and costly punishment , 2006, Nature.

[44]  Karl Sigmund,et al.  Indirect reciprocity, image scoring, and moral hazard. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[45]  Yoh Iwasa,et al.  The leading eight: social norms that can maintain cooperation by indirect reciprocity. , 2006, Journal of theoretical biology.