Choosiness for Cooperation

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


To explain why cooperation with nonrelatives arises and persists in populations, British researchers developed a computational model in which players have varying degrees of cooperativeness (a willingness to allow partners to accrue benefits at their own expense) and choosiness (a willingness to leave partners based on their teamwork). After each round of play, an individual receives a payoff that reflects the effort both teammates exert. Individuals do best, however, if they manage to get their partners to do most of the work. After the payoff, players can continue together to the next round or decide to divorce the other, in which case each would be randomly paired with another partner. Because players that are repeatedly divorced get slapped with greater costs than those that stick together, cooperation and choosiness rise in tandem when many rounds are played—the equivalent of long life spans. Choose the January 10 Nature for the complete payoff.

Philip Yam is the managing editor of ScientificAmerican.com, responsible for the overall news content online. He began working at the magazine in 1989, first as a copyeditor and then as a features editor specializing in physics. He is the author of The Pathological Protein: Mad Cow, Chronic Wasting and Other Prion Diseases.

More by Philip Yam
Scientific American Magazine Vol 298 Issue 3This article was published with the title “Choosiness for Cooperation” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 298 No. 3 (), p. 31
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0308-31b

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe