A Networked ${N}$ -Player Trust Game and Its Evolutionary Dynamics
Open accessAbstract
Trust and trustworthiness are of great importance in social and human systems, especially when considering managerial and economic decision-making. In this paper, we investigate the emergent dynamics of an evolutionary game-theoretic model-the N-player evolutionary trust game-consisting of three types of players: 1) an investor; 2) a trustee who is trustworthy; and 3) a trustee who is untrustworthy. Here, we limit the interactions between players to local neighborhoods defined by a specific spatial topology or social network. Players are able to adjust their game-playing strategies using an evolutionary update rule based on the payoffs obtained by their neighbors. Through comprehensive simulation experiments, we find that trust can be promoted when players interact on a social network despite a substantial number of untrustworthy individuals in the initial population. These results differ from findings reported for an unstructured population of the same game, where the existence of a single untrustworthy individual would eliminate trust completely. We compare the dynamics of the model with different social network densities and structures (e.g., from regular lattices to scale-free and random networks). We observe that the levels of trust vary under different network structures, and the level is correlated with how “difficult” the game is. When game conditions are easy (i.e., low temptation to defect and/or almost no initial untrustworthy trustees), homogeneous networks with higher densities can promote higher levels of trust. However, when the game becomes harder, heterogeneous social networks with lower densities are able to promote higher levels of trust and global net wealth.
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
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.
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?
Trust can be maintained no matter whether the environment of the trust game is mild or harsh.
“our results show that trust can be maintained no matter whether the environment of the trust game is mild or harsh.”
From Conditional investment strategy in evolutionary trust games with repeated group interactions (2022) · cites this paper as [8]
Previous studies on enhancing trust are usually carried out in the framework of one-shot interaction.
“Although there were attempts for enhancing the level of trust from different aspects, we notice that these studies are usually carried out in the framework of one-shot interaction, to our knowledge [8, 9, 16, 24, 26].”
From Conditional investment strategy in evolutionary trust games with repeated group interactions (2022) · cites this paper as [8]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 50 · Cited by 95
- Authors
- Chica, M., Chiong, R., Kirley, M., & Ishibuchi, H.
- Affiliations
- University of Newcastle Australia (AU)
- The University of Melbourne (AU)
- Southern University of Science and Technology (CN)
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation
- Published
- 2018-12
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 866-878
- ISSN
- 1089-778X (ISSN-L)
- 1941-0026
- OpenAlex
- W2765843332
- Cited by
- 95
- References
- 50
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 2 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 18.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- Locations
- IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation (publishedVersion)
- Institutional Repository of the University of Granada (University of Granada) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- RUNE (Research UNE) (submittedVersion)
- NOVA (University of Newcastle Australia) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Australian Government’s 2016 Endeavor Research Fellowship
- Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad (TIN2015-67661-P)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Evolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Game Theory and Applications
- Keywords
- trust game, trustworthiness, evolutionary game theory, social networks, network topology, scale-free networks, random networks, regular lattices, network density, temptation to defect, global wealth
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