Strict or Graduated Punishment? Effect of Punishment Strictness on the Evolution of Cooperation in Continuous Public Goods Games

21Citations
Citations of this article
53Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Whether costly punishment encourages cooperation is one of the principal questions in studies on the evolution of cooperation and social sciences. In society, punishment helps deter people from flouting rules in institutions. Specifically, graduated punishment is a design principle for long-enduring common-pool resource institutions. In this study, we investigate whether graduated punishment can promote a higher cooperation level when each individual plays the public goods game and has the opportunity to punish others whose cooperation levels fall below the punisher's threshold. We then examine how spatial structure affects evolutionary dynamics when each individual dies inversely proportional to the game score resulting from the social interaction and another player is randomly chosen from the population to produce offspring to fill the empty site created after a player's death. Our evolutionary simulation outcomes demonstrate that stricter punishment promotes increased cooperation more than graduated punishment in a spatially structured population, whereas graduated punishment increases cooperation more than strict punishment when players interact with randomly chosen opponents from the population. The mathematical analysis also supports the results. © 2013 Shimao, Nakamaru.

Figures

  • Figure 1. Punishment severity. (a) and (b) show the relationship between the cooperation level of the opponent (horizontal axis) and the damage from punishment (vertical axis) when punishment is graduated (a = 2) and strict (a = 1,000), respectively. The other parameters are f = 1.0, u= 0.5, and b=1.0. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0059894.g001
  • Figure 2. Effectiveness of public goods (r) and evolution of cooperation level without punishment. (A) and (B) present the cooperation level after 1,000,000 generations in the spatially structured condition and the random-matching condition, respectively. Other conditions are the same as noted in the main text. Each data block is the average of 50 trials. (C) presents the relationship between a value and color in both (A) and (B). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0059894.g002
  • Figure 4. Effect of randomness on evolution of cooperation level when a is fixed. The horizontal and vertical axes represent randomness (p) and the value of the cooperation level (x), respectively, after 1,000,000 generations. The dotted blue line with open points is the average x of 50 trials of a= 0.0; the orange dotted line with open triangles, a=0.01; the green dotted line with open squares, a= 0.07; the black dotted line, a=0.1; the solid red line with points, a= 1; the dotted blue line with triangles, a= 2; the orange solid line with squares, a= 5; the green dotted line with diamonds, a= 20; the black solid line with inverted triangles, a=100; and the red dotted line with stars, a= 1,000. Other parameters are the same as in Fig. 3. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0059894.g004
  • Figure 3. Evolution of cooperation level, punishment severity, and punishment threshold in the spatially structured condition. Values are averages of 50 trials at 1,000,000 generations. The horizontal and vertical axes represent log a and the value of each trait, respectively. The cooperation level (x) is denoted by a solid red line and points, the punishment severity (f) is denoted by an orange dotted line and triangles, and the punishment threshold (u) by a solid blue line and squares. The final level of cooperation with no punishment is 0.06272092 in the spatially structured condition and 0.03539616 in the random-matching condition. (A) presents the spatially structured condition and (B) the random-matching condition. The value of a used in this figure is 0.01, 0.07, 0.1, 1, 2, 5, 20, 100, and 1,000. When a= 0.0, (x, f, u) = (0.0747, 0.0327, 0.3223). The parameters are r=3, b=10. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0059894.g003
  • Figure 5. Effects of parameters on evolution in the spatially structured condition. The horizontal and vertical axes represent the effectiveness of public goods (r) and punishment (b), respectively. Each data block is the average of 50 trials. (A), (B), (C), and (D) represent the average values of a (strictness), x (cooperation level), f (punishment level), and u (punishment threshold) at 1,000,000 generations, respectively. Deeper color means that the trait evolved to a higher value. Each bar below each graph presents the relationship between a value and color. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0059894.g005
  • Figure 6. Effects of parameters on evolution in the random-matching condition. The horizontal and vertical axes represent the effectiveness of public goods (r) and punishment (b). (A), (B), (C), and (D) represent the average values of a (strictness), x (cooperation level), f (punishment level), and u (punishment threshold) at 1,000,000 generations, respectively. Deeper color means the trait evolved to a higher value. Each data block is the average of 50 trials. Each bar below each graph presents the relationship between a value and color. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0059894.g006
  • Figure 7. Pairwise invasibility plots (PIPs) of cooperation level when other traits are not adaptive. The horizontal and vertical axes represent the wild and mutant type, respectively. The black region means the mutant type can invade the population occupied by the wild type (I.0 in Eq. 6), and the white region means the mutant type cannot invade (I ,0). The black diagonal means I= 0. The small graph in each figure presents the punishment cost assumed in each of (A)–(I). In each small graph, the horizontal and vertical axes represent the opponent’s cooperation level and the punishment cost of the focal player. Parameters are z= 8, r= 3, b= 10, d= 0.1, and u= 0.5; (A) a=0.0 and f= 0.9; (B) a= 0.01 and f= 0.9; (C) a= 0.07 and f= 0.9; (D) a=1 and f= 0.5; (E) a=2 and f=0.9; (F) a= 5 and f= 0.9; (G) a= 20 and f=0.9; (H) a=100 and f=0.9; and (I) a=1,000 and f=0.9. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0059894.g007

References Powered by Scopus

The genetical evolution of social behaviour. I

10309Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The evolution of cooperation

6154Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Five rules for the evolution of cooperation

4384Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Competition and cooperation among different punishing strategies in the spatial public goods game

222Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Competition of tolerant strategies in the spatial public goods game

134Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Benefits of tolerance in public goods games

76Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Shimao, H., & Nakamaru, M. (2013). Strict or Graduated Punishment? Effect of Punishment Strictness on the Evolution of Cooperation in Continuous Public Goods Games. PLoS ONE, 8(3). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0059894

Readers over time

‘13‘14‘15‘16‘17‘18‘19‘20‘21‘22‘23‘2406121824

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 19

63%

Researcher 6

20%

Professor / Associate Prof. 4

13%

Lecturer / Post doc 1

3%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Social Sciences 8

30%

Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7

26%

Computer Science 6

22%

Psychology 6

22%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Social Media
Shares, Likes & Comments: 2

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0