The name is absent

probabilities under the conjecture that every player follows the sanctioning behavior
specified by the social norm; the other is derived under the conjecture that one player
deviates from the sanctioning behavior, once.

Case 1. Off-equilibrium, everyone sanctions. Consider a player who currently selects
Z. Let ρ=(ρ₁,ρ₂,ρ₃,ρ₄) with ρ_d being the probability that he meets a cooperator given
that d =1,L, 4 players currently select Z. Clearly, the probability that he meets someone
who chooses Z is 1 - ρ. Recall that each player can be paired to three other players, with
equal probability. Therefore, we have

ρ=(^1,2, 3^,0)

Here, the transition matrix is:

123

010

0 1/3 0

000

000

The bold numbers in the rows (columns) indicate the number D_t (D_t+1 ) of players who
currently (next period) play Z. Each cell represents the corresponding conditional
probability Pr[ Dt₊₁1 Dt ]. Clearly, Pr [2|1] = Pr [4|3] = 1 since if an odd number of players
plays Z today, then at least one of them is paired to a cooperator. The latter will choose Z
in t + 1 . Also, Pr [4|4] = 1, since the social norm does not specify reversion to
cooperation. To see why Pr [2|2] = 1/3 and Pr [4|2] = 2/3 recall that there are three
possible pairings. One of those involves the two players who currently choose Z. So, with
probability 1/3 the sanctioning behavior does not spread further. If that pairing is not
realized, then Z will be necessarily seen by the remaining two cooperators. So, with
probability 2/3, next period everyone will choose the sanction, Z.

Case 2. Off equilibrium, one player does not use the prescribed sanction.

Suppose, off-equilibrium, a player who observed a deviation in the past chooses to
deviate from the sanctioning rule and plays Y this period. Instead, everybody else follows
the social norm. Consider this player. Again, ρ_d is the probability that he meets a

34

<<   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   >>

More intriguing information