TY - JOUR
T1 - Indirect reciprocity can stabilize cooperation without the second-order free rider problem
AU - Panchanathan, Karthik
AU - Boyd, Robert
N1 - Funding Information:
Acknowledgements We thank C. Barrett, S. Bowles, E. Fehr, H. Gintis, J. Henrich, R. Kurzban, S. Naficy, C. Navarrete, D. Penn, J. Silk and the Experimental Biological Anthropology Group for discussions. We especially thank K. Haley for developing the ideas presented in this paper. K.P. was funded by an NSF Graduate Research Fellowship.
Funding Information:
Acknowledgements We thank W. Cheng, G. Dickens, D. Schrag, L. Sloan and F. I. Woodward for comments. Funding was provided by a National Science Foundation Biocomplexity grant. G.J.B. was supported by the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship Program, and D.J.B. gratefully acknowledges funding from the Royal Society and the Leverhulme Trust.
PY - 2004/11/25
Y1 - 2004/11/25
N2 - Models of large-scale human cooperation take two forms. 'Indirect reciprocity' occurs when individuals help others in order to uphold a reputation and so be included in future cooperation. In 'collective action', individuals engage in costly behaviour that benefits the group as a whole. Although the evolution of indirect reciprocity is theoretically plausible, there is no consensus about how collective action evolves. Evidence suggests that punishing free riders can maintain cooperation, but why individuals should engage in costly punishment is unclear. Solutions to this 'second-order free rider problem' include meta-punishment, mutation, conformism, signalling and group-selection. The threat of exclusion from indirect reciprocity can sustain collective action in the laboratory. Here, we show that such exclusion is evolutionarily stable, providing an incentive to engage in costly cooperation, while avoiding the second-order free rider problem because punishers can with hold help from free riders without damaging their reputations. However, we also show that such a strategy cannot invade a population in which indirect reciprocity is not linked to collective action, thus leaving unexplained how collective action arises.
AB - Models of large-scale human cooperation take two forms. 'Indirect reciprocity' occurs when individuals help others in order to uphold a reputation and so be included in future cooperation. In 'collective action', individuals engage in costly behaviour that benefits the group as a whole. Although the evolution of indirect reciprocity is theoretically plausible, there is no consensus about how collective action evolves. Evidence suggests that punishing free riders can maintain cooperation, but why individuals should engage in costly punishment is unclear. Solutions to this 'second-order free rider problem' include meta-punishment, mutation, conformism, signalling and group-selection. The threat of exclusion from indirect reciprocity can sustain collective action in the laboratory. Here, we show that such exclusion is evolutionarily stable, providing an incentive to engage in costly cooperation, while avoiding the second-order free rider problem because punishers can with hold help from free riders without damaging their reputations. However, we also show that such a strategy cannot invade a population in which indirect reciprocity is not linked to collective action, thus leaving unexplained how collective action arises.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=9644289531&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=9644289531&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1038/nature02978
DO - 10.1038/nature02978
M3 - Article
C2 - 15565153
AN - SCOPUS:9644289531
SN - 0028-0836
VL - 432
SP - 499
EP - 502
JO - Nature
JF - Nature
IS - 7016
ER -