Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30266934›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2018

Cooperation in the spatial prisoner's dilemma game with probabilistic abstention.

Marcos Cardinot, Josephine Griffith, Colm O'Riordan, Matjaž Perc

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Dying to cooperate: the role of environmental harshness in human collaboration.Behavioral ecology : official journal of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Marcos CardinotDiscipline of Information Technology, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland. marcos.cardinot@nuigalway.ie.
Josephine GriffithDiscipline of Information Technology, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.
Colm O'RiordanDiscipline of Information Technology, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.
Matjaž PercFaculty of Natural Sciences and Mathematics, University of Maribor, Koroška cesta 160, SI-2000, Maribor, Slovenia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3087-541X

Funding

Javna Agencija za Raziskovalno Dejavnost RS (Slovenian Research Agency) P5-0027Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation | Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (National Council for Scientific and Technological Development) 234913/2014-2
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Research has shown that the addition of abstention as an option transforms social dilemmas to rock-paper-scissor type games, where defectors dominate cooperators, cooperators dominate abstainers (loners), and abstainers (loners), in turn, dominate defectors. In this way, abstention can sustain cooperation even under adverse conditions, although defection also persists due to cyclic dominance. However, to abstain or to act as a loner has, to date, always been considered as an independent, third strategy to complement traditional cooperation and defection. Here we consider probabilistic abstention, where each player is assigned a probability to abstain in a particular instance of the game. In the two limiting cases, the studied game reverts to the prisoner's dilemma game without loners or to the optional prisoner's dilemma game. For intermediate probabilities, we have a new hybrid game, which turns out to be most favorable for the successful evolution of cooperation. We hope this novel hybrid game provides a more realistic view of the dilemma of optional/voluntary participation.

Indexed as

Prisoner DilemmaCooperative BehaviorGame TheoryHumansInterpersonal RelationsProbability

Identifiers

PMID30266934
PMCPMC6162230

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.