"Harvard scientists helped develop an algorithm for predicting whether a social structure is likely to favor cooperation." summarizes Peter Reuell, Harvard Staff Writer.
In new research on social networks, ‘a mathematical argument for stable families or for stable friendships’.
Large social networks foster
connections by erasing national, geographic, and even linguistic
barriers. But when it comes to fostering cooperation, global
connectivity leaves something to be desired, new research says.
Working with colleagues at Emmanuel College, Harvard scientists have
developed an algorithm that predicts whether a social structure is
likely to favor cooperation, and the findings suggest that strong
pairwise relationships — not loose networks scattered across the globe —
are the most conducive to cooperation. The study is described in a
March 29 paper in Nature.
“What we are able to do is calculate the critical benefit-to-cost
ratio for cooperation to thrive on any fixed population structure,” said
senior author Martin Nowak,
a professor of mathematics and of biology and director of the Program
for Evolutionary Dynamics. “And what we find is truly interesting. We
can take any graph or social network, and if it has strong pairwise
ties, that is what is most conducive for cooperation. This is a
mathematical argument for stable families or for stable friendships.”
“I think one of the messages here is that while global
interconnectedness has increased rapidly over the past few decades,
there are downsides to that,” said first author Benjamin Allen, an
assistant professor of mathematics at Emmanuel College and a researcher
at the Program for Evolutionary Dynamics. “More connectivity won’t
necessarily promote people being good to each other. It’s not that
global connections are bad, but they are no substitute for a small
number of strong local connections.”
Scientists for decades have sought to understand the interplay
between social structure and evolution, beginning with “well-mixed”
populations. Mathematical models have demonstrated that in such
populations — where every individual interacts with every other
individual — evolution selects against cooperation, causing it to
eventually die out.
In 2006, however, Nowak and colleagues showed that in certain
“special” populations — particularly those in which all members have the
same number of connections — selection leans in favor of cooperation.
Read more...
Source: Harvard Gazette