The essay above is to be printed in "Across Species Comparisons and Psychopathology, May, 1998. Just as I had it all tacked down, I got another book from Amazon. The following thoughts unfolded as I read it in the local mall.
-------------
Robert Axelrod's "The Complexity of Cooperation" (1997) arrived today. Page 31 cites a study by Axelrod & Dion (1988) that concluded "noise" calls for forgiveness; too much forgiveness invites exploitation.” Axelrod cleverly inserted "noise" into the Prisoner’s Dilemma by having a computer randomly change the option taken by one of the participants. The second player had no information whether the overt response was the same as or different from that intended by the first one. Under noise conditions, Generous Tit for Tat and Contrite Tit for Tat emerged as superior to regular T4T. Generous T4T means that several betrayals are allowed before retaliation occurs. Contrite T4T means that the first player, after commiting a betrayal, is cooperative with the second until the second shows positive reciprocity.
If mania is conceived as a state of heightened response variability, then enablers make reciprocity more likely to survive episodes of erratic conduct or selfish deceit. "Contrition" overlaps with the verbal "I’m sorry and won’t do it again" that softens some mothers, wives, husbands, and religions to continue or to reinstate their forgiving tactics. There is a cost, however, to forgiveness because being forgiving also raises the probability of being cheated. Thus, the adolescent who shows no "remorse" is judged a poorer treatment candidate and less eligible for Generous T4T than one who apologizes. Strings of betrayals imply systematic "exploitation" rather than "noise”" These analogs suggest ways that alliances can be protected while also protecting the interests of individual participants.
REFERENCE:
Axelrod, R. (1997) The complexity of Cooperation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press, p. 31.