Indirect reciprocity with dual private assessment

People often cooperate out of concern for their reputation. The corresponding theory of indirect reciprocity predicts that such cooperation can only evolve if people's opinions of each other are sufficiently correlated. This correlation, however, can be difficult to achieve when individuals form their opinions independently from one another, as in private assessment models. In that case, errors can generate disagreements that propagate throughout a population. Here, we identify a simple mechanism that mitigates this problem. Most prior work assumes that observers revise only the reputations of donors-the individuals who choose whether to cooperate or defect. We instead allow observers to also revise the reputations of recipients-the individuals affected by the donors' choices. Using analytical calculations and simulations, we show that such dual reputation updates help synchronize opinions and facilitate cooperation. To demonstrate this approach, we focus on a particularly simple rule, which we call Recipient Image Scoring (RIS). Under RIS, recipients are assessed as good whenever donors choose to cooperate with them. We show that this rule for judging recipients effectively complements the classical leading-eight rules for judging donors. Our results establish dual assessment as a simple mechanism for cooperation that relies only on directly observable information.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2026-08-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2624656123
Primary Topic
Evolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Indirect reciprocity with dual private assessment

Yukari Jessica Tham, Christian Hilbe, Yohsuke Murase
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Evolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation
article

Indirect reciprocity with dual private assessment

Yukari Jessica Tham, Christian Hilbe, Yohsuke Murase
article en

Abstract

People often cooperate out of concern for their reputation. The corresponding theory of indirect reciprocity predicts that such cooperation can only evolve if people's opinions of each other are sufficiently correlated. This correlation, however, can be difficult to achieve when individuals form their opinions independently from one another, as in private assessment models. In that case, errors can generate disagreements that propagate throughout a population. Here, we identify a simple mechanism that mitigates this problem. Most prior work assumes that observers revise only the reputations of donors-the individuals who choose whether to cooperate or defect. We instead allow observers to also revise the reputations of recipients-the individuals affected by the donors' choices. Using analytical calculations and simulations, we show that such dual reputation updates help synchronize opinions and facilitate cooperation. To demonstrate this approach, we focus on a particularly simple rule, which we call Recipient Image Scoring (RIS). Under RIS, recipients are assessed as good whenever donors choose to cooperate with them. We show that this rule for judging recipients effectively complements the classical leading-eight rules for judging donors. Our results establish dual assessment as a simple mechanism for cooperation that relies only on directly observable information.

Proceedings of the National Academy of SciencesVol. 123(35)
Center for Theoretical Physics (PL), Bavarian Research Institute for Digital Transformation (DE), RIKEN Center for Computational Science (JP), Kobe University (JP), Saitama University (JP)
Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, European Research Council, Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, RIKEN
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Evolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.