Cited by 148Evolutionary Game Theory and CooperationExperimental Behavioral Economics StudiesEvolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 97 of the 97 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The evolution of trust and trustworthiness

Open access
Kumar, Aanjaneya, Capraro, Valerio, Perc, Matjaž·2020·Journal of The Royal Society Interface

Abstract

Trust and trustworthiness form the basis for continued social and economic interactions, and they are also fundamental for cooperation, fairness, honesty, and indeed for many other forms of prosocial and moral behaviour. However, trust entails risks, and building a trustworthy reputation requires effort. So how did trust and trustworthiness evolve, and under which conditions do they thrive? To find answers, we operationalize trust and trustworthiness using the trust game with the trustor's investment and the trustee's return of the investment as the two key parameters. We study this game on different networks, including the complete network, random and scale-free networks, and in the well-mixed limit. We show that in all but one case, the network structure has little effect on the evolution of trust and trustworthiness. Specifically, for well-mixed populations, lattices, random and scale-free networks, we find that trust never evolves, while trustworthiness evolves with some probability depending on the game parameters and the updating dynamics. Only for the scale-free network with degree non-normalized dynamics, we find parameter values for which trust evolves but trustworthiness does not, as well as values for which both trust and trustworthiness evolve. We conclude with a discussion about mechanisms that could lead to the evolution of trust and outline directions for future work.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rsif.2020.0491

Cites

97 of 97 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 97 references

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Pinker S, 2011, The better angels of our nature: why wiolence has declined
  2. Pinker S, 2018, Enlightenment now: the case for reason, science, humanism, and progress
  3. Estrada E, 2012, The structure of complex networks: theory and applications
  4. Barabási AL, 2015, Network science
  5. Stanley HE, 1971, Introduction to phase transitions and critical phenomena
  6. Landau DP, 2000, A guide to Monte Carlo simulations in statistical physics
  7. Pereira LM Lenaerts T Martinez-Vaquero LA Han TA. 2017 Social manifestation of guilt leads to stable cooperation in multi-agent systems. In AAMAS '17: Proc. of the 16th Conf. on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems 8–12 May São Paulo Brazil pp. 1422–1430. New York NY: ACM.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Kumar, A., Capraro, V., & Perc, M.
Affiliations
  • Indian Institute of Science Education and Research Pune (IN)
  • Middlesex University London (GB)
  • China Medical University (TW)
Corresponding author
Capraro, Valerio
Venue
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
Published
2020-08
Volume
17
Issue
169
Pages
20200491
ISSN
  • 1742-5662 (ISSN-L)
  • 1742-5689
OpenAlex
W3048692749
Cited by
148
References
97
Citations by year
2026: 27 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 7
FWCI
21.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of The Royal Society Interface (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Middlesex University Research Repository (Middlesex University Of London) (acceptedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • BOA (University of Milano-Bicocca) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Evolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
Keywords
trustworthiness, trust game, cooperation, social networks, scale-free networks, random networks, well-mixed populations, lattice networks, reputation, prosocial behavior, evolutionary dynamics
MeSH terms
Probability, Trust

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review