Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 25, 2025

The Collective Trust Game: An Online Group Adaptation of the Trust Game Based on the HoneyComb Paradigm
Published on: October 20, 2022
Defectors in bad circumstances possessing higher reputation can promote cooperation
Lan Zhang1, Liming Zhang2, Changwei Huang3
1School of Information, Xi'an University of Finance and Economics, Xi'an 710100, China.
Abstract:
In nature and human society, social relationships and behavior patterns are usually unpredictable. In any interaction, individuals will constantly have to deal with prior uncertainty. The concept of "reputation" can provide some information to mitigate such uncertainty. In previous studies, researchers have considered that only cooperators are able to maintain a high reputation; no matter the circumstances of a defector, they are classified as a faithless individual. In reality, however, some individuals will be forced to defect to protect themselves against exploitation. Therefore, it makes sense that defectors in bad circumstances could also obtain higher reputations, and cooperators can maintain higher reputations in comfortable circumstances. In this work, the reputations of individuals are calculated using the fraction of their neighbors who have the same strategy. In this way, some defectors in a population may obtain higher reputations than some cooperators. We introduce this reputation rule using heterogeneous investments in public goods games. Our numerical simulation results indicate that this reputation rule and heterogeneous investments can better stimulate cooperation. Additionally, stronger investment heterogeneity can further increase the level of cooperation. To explain this phenomenon, dynamical evolution is observed in Monte Carlo simulations. We also investigated the effects of the noise intensity of the irrational population and the original proportion of cooperation in the population. The robustness of this cooperation model was also considered with respect to the network structure and total investment, and we found that the conclusions remained the same.
Related Concept Videos
The Stanford Prison Experiment
Secondary Motives: Affiliation Motivation and Aggression Motivation
Robbers Cave
In- and Out-Groups
Bystander Effect
Deindividuation

