Emergent Dynamics of Fairness in the Spatial Coevolution of Proposer and Responder Species in the Ultimatum Game

While spatially local interactions are ubiquitous between coevolving species sharing recourses (e.g., plant-insect interactions), their effects on such coevolution processes of strategies involving the share of a resource are still not clearly understood. We construct a two-dimensional spatial model of the coevolution of the proposer and responder species in the ultimatum game (UG), in which a pair of proposer and responder individuals at each site plays the UG. We investigate the effects of the locality of interactions and the intensity of selection on the emergence of fairness between these species. We show that the lower intensity of selection favors fair strategies in general, and there are no significant differences in the evolution of fairness between the cases with local and global interactions when the intensity of selection is low. However, as the intensity of selection becomes higher, the spatially local interactions contribute to the evolution of fairer strategies more than the global interactions, even though fair strategies become more difficult to evolve. This positive effect of spatial interactions is expected to be due to the mutual benefit of fairness for both proposer and responder species in future generations, which brings about a dynamic evolution process of fairness.

[1]  A. Kawakita,et al.  Evolution of obligate pollination mutualism in New Caledonian Phyllanthus (Euphorbiaceae). , 2004, American journal of botany.

[2]  E. Kiers,et al.  Selective flower abortion maintains moth cooperation in a newly discovered pollination mutualism. , 2010, Ecology letters.

[3]  Stuart A. West,et al.  Sanctions and mutualism stability: when should less beneficial mutualists be tolerated? , 2002 .

[4]  Dirk Helbing,et al.  Power and Fairness in a Generalized Ultimatum Game , 2014, PloS one.

[5]  M. Johannesson,et al.  Heritability of ultimatum game responder behavior , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[6]  Hiroki Sayama,et al.  Evolution of Fairness in the Not Quite Ultimatum Game , 2014, Scientific Reports.

[7]  J. Henrich Does culture matter in economic behavior? Ultimatum game bargaining among the machiguenga , 2000 .

[8]  G. Szabó,et al.  Defense mechanisms of empathetic players in the spatial ultimatum game. , 2012, Physical review letters.

[9]  Á. Sánchez,et al.  The spatial Ultimatum game revisited. , 2011, Journal of theoretical biology.

[10]  David G. Rand,et al.  Evolution of fairness in the one-shot anonymous Ultimatum Game , 2013, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[11]  Makoto Kato,et al.  An obligate pollination mutualism and reciprocal diversification in the tree genus Glochidion (Euphorbiaceae) , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[12]  A. Kawakita,et al.  Active pollination favours sexual dimorphism in floral scent , 2013, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[13]  M. Nowak,et al.  The spatial ultimatum game , 2000, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[14]  Long Wang,et al.  The coevolutionary ultimatum game , 2011 .

[15]  W. Güth,et al.  An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining , 1982 .