New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

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

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe