The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Participation costs dismiss the advantage of heterogeneous networks in evolution of cooperation
Open accessAbstract
Real social interactions occur on networks in which each individual is connected to some, but not all, of others. In social dilemma games with a fixed population size, heterogeneity in the number of contacts per player is known to promote evolution of cooperation. Under a common assumption of positively biased pay-off structure, well-connected players earn much by playing frequently, and cooperation once adopted by well-connected players is unbeatable and spreads to others. However, maintaining a social contact can be costly, which would prevent local pay-offs from being positively biased. In replicator-type evolutionary dynamics, it is shown that even a relatively small participation cost extinguishes the merit of heterogeneous networks in terms of cooperation. In this situation, more connected players earn less so that they are no longer spreaders of cooperation. Instead, those with fewer contacts win and guide the evolution. The participation cost, or the baseline pay-off, is irrelevant in homogeneous populations, but is essential for evolutionary games on heterogeneous networks.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Five Rules for the Evolution of Cooperation
Nowak, M. A. (2006) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1133755 · Cited by 5,894
Evolutionary Games and Population Dynamics
Hofbauer, J., & Sigmund, K. (1998) · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139173179 · Cited by 5,502
A simple rule for the evolution of cooperation on graphs and social networks
Ohtsuki, H., Hauert, C., Lieberman, E., & Nowak, M. A. (2006) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature04605 · Cited by 2,208
Dawes, R. M. (1980) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.ps.31.020180.001125 · Cited by 2,022
Cooperation Prevails When Individuals Adjust Their Social Ties
Santos, F. C., Pacheco, J. M., & Lenaerts, T. (2006) · PLoS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.0020140 · Cited by 556
Cited by
Universal scaling for the dilemma strength in evolutionary games
Wang, Z., Kokubo, S., Jusup, M., & Tanimoto, J. (2015) · Physics of Life Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.plrev.2015.04.033 · Cited by 586
Interdependent network reciprocity in evolutionary games
Wang, Z., Szolnoki, A., & Perc, M. (2013) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep01183 · Cited by 485
Optimal interdependence between networks for the evolution of cooperation
Wang, Z., Szolnoki, A., & Perc, M. (2013) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep02470 · Cited by 311
Conformity enhances network reciprocity in evolutionary social dilemmas
Szolnoki, A., & Perc, M. (2015) · Journal of The Royal Society Interface · doi:10.1098/rsif.2014.1299 · Cited by 259
Networks of reliable reputations and cooperation: a review
Takács, K., Gross, J., Testori, M., Letina, S., Kenny, A. R., Power, E. A., & Wittek, R. P. M. (2021) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B · doi:10.1098/rstb.2020.0297 · Cited by 61
Metadata
- Authors
- Masuda, N.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
- Publisher
- The Royal Society
- Published
- 2007-05-15
- Volume
- 274
- Issue
- 1620
- Pages
- 1815-1821
- ISSN
- 0080-4649 (ISSN-L)
- 0962-8452
- 1471-2954
- OpenAlex
- W2101739443
- Cited by
- 188
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 42.90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Participation costs dismiss the advantage of heterogeneous networks in evolution of cooperation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1098/rspb.2007.0294
- The paper
- Masuda, N. (2007). Participation costs dismiss the advantage of heterogeneous networks in evolution of cooperation. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2007.0294
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.