Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/2381/32931
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorRapoport, Amnon-
dc.contributor.authorSeale, Darryl A.-
dc.contributor.authorColman, Andrew M.-
dc.date.accessioned2015-08-11T15:51:09Z-
dc.date.available2015-08-11T15:51:09Z-
dc.date.issued2015-07-30-
dc.identifier.citationPLoS One, 10 (7), e0134128en
dc.identifier.urihttp://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0134128en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2381/32931-
dc.description.abstractAxelrod's celebrated Prisoner's Dilemma computer tournaments, published in the early 1980s, were designed to find effective ways of acting in everyday interactions with the strategic properties of the iterated Prisoner's Dilemma game. The winner of both tournaments was tit-for-tat, a program that cooperates on the first round and then, on every subsequent round, copies the co-player's choice from the previous round. This has been interpreted as evidence that tit-for-tat is an effective general-purpose strategy. By re-analyzing data from the first tournament and some more recent data, we provide new results suggesting that the efficacy of tit-for-tat is contingent on the design of the tournament, the criterion used to determine success, and the particular values chosen for the Prisoner's Dilemma payoff matrix. We argue that this places in doubt the generality of the results and the policy implications drawn from them.en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherPLoSen
dc.relation.urihttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26225422-
dc.rightsCopyright © 2015 Rapoport et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.en
dc.titleIs Tit-for-Tat the Answer? On the Conclusions Drawn from Axelrod's Tournamentsen
dc.typeJournal Articleen
dc.identifier.doi10.1371/journal.pone.0134128-
dc.identifier.eissn1932-6203-
dc.identifier.piiPONE-D-15-01678-
dc.description.statusPeer-revieweden
dc.description.versionPublisher Versionen
dc.type.subtypeJOURNAL ARTICLE-
pubs.organisational-group/Organisationen
pubs.organisational-group/Organisation/COLLEGE OF MEDICINE, BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES AND PSYCHOLOGYen
pubs.organisational-group/Organisation/COLLEGE OF MEDICINE, BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES AND PSYCHOLOGY/School of Psychologyen
pubs.organisational-group/Organisation/COLLEGE OF MEDICINE, BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES AND PSYCHOLOGY/Themesen
pubs.organisational-group/Organisation/COLLEGE OF MEDICINE, BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES AND PSYCHOLOGY/Themes/No themeen
dc.dateaccepted2015-07-06-
Appears in Collections:Published Articles, College of Medicine, Biological Sciences and Psychology

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
istitfor.pdfPublished (publisher PDF)221.72 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in LRA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.