Egoistic punishment outcompetes altruistic punishment in the spatial public goods game

Juan Li,Yi Liu,Zhen Wang,Haoxiang Xia

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-85814-1

IF: 4.6

2021-03-22

Scientific Reports

Abstract:Abstract The evolution of costly punishment is a puzzle due to cooperators’ second-order free-riding. Previous studies have proposed many solutions mainly focused on reducing the punishment cost or punishing second-order free riders directly or indirectly. We attempt to explain this confusion from the perspective of punishment motivation, which is why the punisher is willing to pay the cost. The answer is that the punisher is egoistic. Egoistic punishment aims to protect punishers’ own cooperative benefits shared by the defectors. In such case, egoistic punishers would pay a cost in punishing defectors and retrieve lost payoffs from defectors. Here, we examined the evolution and performance of egoistic punishment and compared it with typical altruistic punishment using classic peer-punishment and pool-punishment modes. Results showed egoistic punishment can evolve and effectively promote cooperation within a large parameter range, whether in a well-mixed or structured population, or through peer-punishment or pool-punishment modes. This result is also robust to different strategy-updating rules. The evolution under the pool-punishment mechanism is more complicated. The influence of parameters is counter-intuitive because of cycle dominance; namely, the cost is the key factor to control the level of cooperation and the fine determines the ratio of the punishers and cooperators. Compared with altruistic punishment, egoistic punishment can promote cooperation in a lower-fine and higher-cost area, especially in the pool punishment mode, and the egoistic punishers have stronger survivability. Egoistic punishers represent the natural fairness in a social system. Results revealed that focusing on individual equity can significantly promote collective cooperation. This study provides another explanation for the evolution of costly punishment.

multidisciplinary sciences

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The paper primarily explores the issue of how egoistic punishment promotes cooperation in the Public Goods Game (PGG). Specifically, the study attempts to explain the second-order free rider problem in cooperation from the perspective of punishment motivation, that is, why individuals are willing to incur additional costs to punish defectors.

The key contributions of the paper include:
1. **The concept of egoistic punishment**: Egoistic punishment is defined as actions taken by the punisher to protect their own interests that may be encroached upon by defectors in cooperation. This form of punishment allows the punisher to recover part of the loss from the defectors.
2. **Comparison with altruistic punishment**: By comparing the classic altruistic punishment, where the punisher punishes defectors out of purely altruistic motives without expecting any return, the paper demonstrates how egoistic punishment can more effectively promote cooperation under different punishment modes.
3. **Experimental design**: The study employed two punishment modes—peer punishment and pool punishment—to conduct simulation experiments and analyzed the results under different parameter settings.
4. **Main findings**: The results show that within a wide range of parameters, regardless of whether in mixed or structured groups, and regardless of the punishment mode adopted, egoistic punishment can evolve and effectively promote cooperation. Particularly, in the pool punishment mode, even with lower fines and higher costs, egoistic punishment can maintain a certain level of cooperation, and egoistic punishers have a stronger survival ability compared to altruistic punishers.

In summary, this study provides a new perspective for understanding the evolution of cooperation mechanisms in the Public Goods Game, emphasizing the importance of focusing on individual fairness to promote collective cooperation.