Best strategies of vervet monkeys
The prisoner’s dilemma, a classic scenario for the application of game theory, is an excellent example in examining the best strategies for separate parties. As such, it acts as a model for other interactions and can be used in exploring fields beyond economics, the field of origin for game theory.
Specifically, the prisoner’s dilemma and along with it game theory is exemplified in many instances in biology from the societies of vervet monkeys to groups of bacteria to human and computer interactions. Through investigating the payoffs of each real life situation the conclusions derived each match the set of best strategies found in the prisoner’s dilemma demonstrating that cooperation between two parties leads to a higher payoff.
The first experiment revolved around vervet monkeys, which is a species of monkeys that scream to alarm other vervet monkeys to warn them of potential nearby predators. Originally, this went against the notion of evolution as screaming vervet monkeys would be more likely to be killed off and result in less screaming monkeys but the strategy deployed in the prisoner’s dilemma helps researchers understand why this is not the case. Observing the payoff matrix for the prisoner’s dilemma we discussed in lecture, the best strategy for both players is to confess which is ultimately the more altruistic strategy. In order to maximize payoffs, if player two confesses then player one should confess and if player two does not confess then player one should also confess and vice versa. The vervet monkeys face a similar dilemma where confessing is the equivalent of screaming and not confessing is the equivalent of not screaming. As such screaming and warning other monkeys would be the best strategy. In addition, the real life scenario also mimics the defecting aspect of the prisoner’s dilemma. Not confessing whereas the other player confesses would offer a massive payoff which is the same as a monkey not screaming whereas the other screams which would offer a high survival chance. Researchers found that monkeys are more likely to survive when they all warn each other. This also matches the pure equilibrium of prisoner’s dilemma being both players confessing. The monkeys have a pure equilibrium where they all alarm one another. This is an example of the prisoner’s dilemma and best strategies in nature and game theory works to rationalize these strategies.
Furthermore, conducting an experiment with humans and computers, researchers found that computers that played against people who followed a more generous strategy won a bigger payout. This follows the same best strategies as the prisoner’s dilemma and the Nash equilibrium. Each experiment discovered that each party tends towards a cooperative “confessing” strategy.
Overall, these sets of experiments aim to display the practice of game theory to further solidify its assertions. The prisoner’s dilemma shows itself in unexpected ways in all different situations and ways ranging from natural selection to human and computers. Game theory’s application in prisoner’s dilemma serves as a great base model to understand the world around and explains the behaviors of many different phenomena. The best strategies are the ones that are cooperative which is supported by the prisoner’s dilemma.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/game-theory-calls-cooperation-into-question1/