» Articles » PMID: 34349193

Peer Pressure Induced Punishment Resolves Social Dilemma on Interdependent Networks

Overview
Journal Sci Rep
Specialty Science
Date 2021 Aug 5
PMID 34349193
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Despite the fruitful evidence to support the emergence of cooperation, irrational decisions are still an essential part of promoting cooperation. Among the many factors that affect human rational decision-making, peer pressure is unique to social organisms and directly affects individual cooperative behaviors in the process of social interaction. This kind of pressure psychologically forces individuals to behave consistently with their partners, and partners with inconsistent behaviors may suffer psychological blows. As feedback, this psychological harm may in turn affect individual cooperative decisions. There is evidence that when peer pressure exists, partnerships can reduce free-riding in enterprise. Based on interdependent networks, this paper studies the impact of peer pressure on cooperation dynamics when the strategies of corresponding partners from different layers of the networks are inconsistent. We assume that when individuals are under peer pressure, their payoffs will be compromised. The simulation results show that the punishment effect will force the expulsion of partners with different strategies, which will further reduce the proportion of partners with inconsistent strategies in the system. However, in most cases, only moderate fines are most conductive to the evolution of cooperation, and the punishment mechanisms can effectively promote the interdependent network reciprocity. The results on the small world and random network prove the robustness of the result. In addition, under this mechanism, the greater the payoff dependence between partners, the better the effect of interdependent network reciprocity.

Citing Articles

The coordination of collective and individual solutions in risk-resistant scenarios.

Qian J, Zhang T, Sun X, Chai Y Eur Phys J B. 2023; 96(2):21.

PMID: 36852005 PMC: 9947898. DOI: 10.1140/epjb/s10051-023-00487-1.


Authority or Autonomy? Exploring Interactions between Central and Peer Punishments in Risk-Resistant Scenarios.

Qian J, Sun X, Zhang T, Chai Y Entropy (Basel). 2022; 24(9).

PMID: 36141176 PMC: 9497953. DOI: 10.3390/e24091289.

References
1.
Ohtsuki H, Hauert C, Lieberman E, Nowak M . A simple rule for the evolution of cooperation on graphs and social networks. Nature. 2006; 441(7092):502-5. PMC: 2430087. DOI: 10.1038/nature04605. View

2.
Wang Z, Jusup M, Wang R, Shi L, Iwasa Y, Moreno Y . Onymity promotes cooperation in social dilemma experiments. Sci Adv. 2017; 3(3):e1601444. PMC: 5371422. DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.1601444. View

3.
Wang Z, Kokubo S, Jusup M, Tanimoto J . Universal scaling for the dilemma strength in evolutionary games. Phys Life Rev. 2015; 14:1-30. DOI: 10.1016/j.plrev.2015.04.033. View

4.
Wang Z, Wang L, Perc M . Degree mixing in multilayer networks impedes the evolution of cooperation. Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys. 2014; 89(5):052813. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.89.052813. View

5.
Wang Z, Jusup M, Shi L, Lee J, Iwasa Y, Boccaletti S . Exploiting a cognitive bias promotes cooperation in social dilemma experiments. Nat Commun. 2018; 9(1):2954. PMC: 6063929. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-018-05259-5. View