title: Dynamical models explaining social balance and evolution of cooperation.
abstract: Social networks with positive and negative links often split into two antagonistic factions. Examples of such a split abound: revolutionaries versus an old regime, Republicans versus Democrats, Axis versus Allies during the second world war, or the Western versus the Eastern bloc during the Cold War. Although this structure, known as social balance, is well understood, it is not clear how such factions emerge. An earlier model could explain the formation of such factions if reputations were assumed to be symmetric. We show this is not the case for non-symmetric reputations, and propose an alternative model which (almost) always leads to social balance, thereby explaining the tendency of social networks to split into two factions. In addition, the alternative model may lead to cooperation when faced with defectors, contrary to the earlier model. The difference between the two models may be understood in terms of the underlying gossiping mechanism: whereas the earlier model assumed that an individual adjusts his opinion about somebody by gossiping about that person with everybody in the network, we assume instead that the individual gossips with that person about everybody. It turns out that the alternative model is able to lead to cooperative behaviour, unlike the previous model.
authors: ICTEAM, Université catholiquede Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium. Vincent.Traag@uclouvain.be
authors: Vincent Antonio
authors: VA
authors: Traag
authors: Paul
authors: P
authors: Van Dooren
authors: Patrick
authors: P
authors: De Leenheer
mesh_terms: D003299:Cooperative Behavior; D008962:Models, Theoretical; D011336:Probability; D060756:Social Networking; D013269:Stochastic Processes; D013997:Time Factors
references: J Psychol. 1946 Jan;21:107-12
references: 21010780
references: Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys. 2005 Sep;72(3 Pt 2):036121
references: 16241529
references: Science. 1981 Mar 27;211(4489):1390-6
references: 7466396
references: Nature. 1998 Jun 11;393(6685):573-7
references: 9634232
references: Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys. 2009 Sep;80(3 Pt 2):036115
references: 19905188
references: Am J Public Health. 2004 Jan;94(1):89-95
references: 14713704
references: J Theor Biol. 2004 Dec 21;231(4):475-86
references: 15488525
references: Phys Rev Lett. 2009 Nov 6;103(19):198701
references: 20365960
references: J Theor Biol. 2004 Nov 7;231(1):107-20
references: 15363933
references: Proc Biol Sci. 2001 Apr 7;268(1468):745-53
references: 11321064
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007 Oct 30;104(44):17435-40
references: 17947384
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 Feb 1;108(5):1771-6
references: 21199953
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1975 Jan;72(1):143-6
references: 1054490
references: Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys. 2007 Feb;75(2 Pt 2):026106
references: 17358393
references: J Theor Biol. 2006 Apr 21;239(4):435-44
references: 16174521
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Aug 3;107(31):13636-41
references: 20643965
references: Science. 2006 Dec 8;314(5805):1560-3
references: 17158317
references: Psychol Rev. 1956 Sep;63(5):277-93
references: 13359597
references: Sci Rep. 2012;2:845
references: 23150792
references: Proc Biol Sci. 2008 Nov 7;275(1650):2529-36
references: 18664435
references: J Theor Biol. 1964 Jul;7(1):1-16
references: 5875341
references: Nature. 2005 Oct 27;437(7063):1291-8
references: 16251955
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 Dec 27;108(52):20953-8
references: 22167802
references: Proc Biol Sci. 2001 Dec 7;268(1484):2495-501
references: 11747570