Instance-Based Models of Metacognition in the Prisoner's Dilemma

In this article, we examine the advantages of simple metacognitive capabilities in a repeated social dilemma. Two types of metacognitive agent were developed and compared with a non-metacognitive agent and two fixed-strategy agents. The first type of metacognitive agent (opponent perspective) takes the perspective of the opponent to anticipate the opponent's future actions and respond accordingly. The other metacognitive agent (modeler) predicts the opponent's next move based on the previous moves of the agent and the opponent. The modeler agent achieves better individual outcomes than a non-metacognitive agent and is more successful at encouraging cooperation. The opponent-perspective agent, by contrast, fails to achieve these outcomes because it lacks important information about the opponent. These simple agents provide insights regarding modeling of metacognition in more complex tasks.

[1]  C. Lebiere,et al.  Modeling trust dynamics in strategic interaction , 2015 .

[2]  G. Logan Toward an instance theory of automatization. , 1988 .

[3]  M. Milinski,et al.  Human cooperation in the simultaneous and the alternating Prisoner's Dilemma: Pavlov versus Generous Tit-for-Tat. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[4]  M. Brüne,et al.  Theory of mind—evolution, ontogeny, brain mechanisms and psychopathology , 2006, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.

[5]  M. Tomasello,et al.  Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind? 30 years later , 2008, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[6]  K. Gluck,et al.  Predicting Trust Dynamics and Transfer of Learning in Games of Strategic Interaction as a Function of a Player’s Strategy and Level of Trustworthiness , 2015 .

[7]  D. Reitter,et al.  Resistance is Futile: Winning Lemonade Market Share through Metacognitive Reasoning in a Three-Agent Cooperative Game , 2010 .

[8]  C. Lebiere,et al.  Instance-Based Cognitive Models of Decision-Making , 2005 .

[9]  William G. Kennedy,et al.  Building a Cognitive Model of Social Trust Within ACT-R , 2013, AAAI Spring Symposium: Trust and Autonomous Systems.

[10]  Randall D. Beer,et al.  Information Processing and Dynamics in Minimally Cognitive Agents , 2015, Cogn. Sci..

[11]  A. Goldman,et al.  Mirror neurons and the simulation theory of mind-reading , 1998, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[12]  Graham Kendall,et al.  Opponent Modelling, Evolution, and the Iterated Prisoner ' s Dilemma , 2007 .

[13]  Cleotilde Gonzalez,et al.  A Cognitive Model of Dynamic Cooperation With Varied Interdependency Information , 2015, Cogn. Sci..

[14]  John R Anderson,et al.  An integrated theory of the mind. , 2004, Psychological review.

[15]  M. Nowak,et al.  A strategy of win-stay, lose-shift that outperforms tit-for-tat in the Prisoner's Dilemma game , 1993, Nature.

[16]  R. Axelrod More Effective Choice in the Prisoner's Dilemma , 1980 .

[17]  Xin Yao,et al.  The Iterated Prisoners' Dilemma - 20 Years On , 2007, Advances in Natural Computation.

[18]  A. Meltzoff 1 Imitation and Other Minds: The "Like Me" Hypothesis , 2005 .

[19]  Bart Verheij,et al.  Higher-Order Theory of Mind in Negotiations under Incomplete Information , 2013, PRIMA.

[20]  Rineke Verbrugge,et al.  Savvy software agents can encourage the use of second-order theory of mind by negotiators , 2015, CogSci.