Axelrod & Hamilton

Aim

to test the theory of reciprocal altruism with humans

Research Method

Laboratory Experiment

Procedure

Different rounds of computer based chess games for 2 players were created to test the idea behind reciprocal altruism and prisoners dilemma

A range of strategies used in games were analysed

A second round of chess games was then analysed from 62 entries covering 6 countries. These submissions came from computer enthusiasts, professors of biology, physics and computer science.

Strategies employed in the chess games were again analysed.

Findings

• The most successful way of achieving the highest average score was to use a tit for tat strategy

• This involved reciprocal arrangement, when players cooperate on the first move and adjust their strategy according to the other players last movement

• Subsequent games went on to highlight how good the tit for tat strategy was when compared to other less reciprocal strategies

  • Players tended to stay “silent” during the first round of the game and see if their partner would do the same

  • If the other player also stayed silent, then both players continued to be silent during the next rounds of the games

Strength

• This study supports the theory of reciprocal altruism, suggesting that altruism is an evolutionary stable strategy, as it results in the best outcome for both parties. There is no fixed figure on the number of possible future interactions that could take place between two individuals; in other words, it’s wise to help your neighbour because at some point in the future you may be needing their help.

Limitations

As this study took place in the lab, and the prisoner's dilemma is an artificial game, it is uncertain if the results of this study can be applied to real-life prosocial behaviour. It therefore lacks ecological validity.