Indirect reciprocity describes a class of reputation-based mechanisms which may explain the prevalence of cooperation in groups where partners meet only once. The first model for which this has analytically been shown was the binary image scoring mechanism, where one's reputation is only based on one's last action. But this mechanism is known to fail if errors in implementation occur. It has thus been claimed that for indirect reciprocity to stabilize cooperation, reputation assessments must be of higher order, i.e. contingent not only on past actions, but also on the reputations of the targets of these actions. We show here that this need not be the case. A simple image scoring mechanism where more than just one past action is observed provides ample possibilities for stable cooperation to emerge even under substantial rates of implementation errors. (authors' abstract) / Series: Department of Economics Working Paper Series

Indirect reciprocity describes a class of reputation-based mechanisms which may explain the prevalence of cooperation in large groups where partners meet only once. The first model for which this has been demonstrated was the image scoring mechanism. But analytical work on the simplest possible case, the binary scoring model, has shown that even small errors in implementation destabilize any cooperative regime. It has thus been claimed that for indirect reciprocity to stabilize cooperation, assessments of reputation must be based on higher-order information. Is indirect reciprocity relying on frst-order information doomed to fail? We use a simple analytical model of image scoring to show that this need not be the case. Indeed, in the general image scoring model the introduction of implementation errors has just the opposite effect as in the binary scoring model: it may stabilize instead of destabilize cooperation.

This paper in philosophy of education deals with order assessment in relation to moral autonomy, which is a way of teaching moral education with the purpose of creating an independent approach towards moral questions. The main research question is ’is order assessment hard to combine with moral autonomy?’. To answer the main question the following questions are used: 1 ’is order assessment hard to combine with a critical approach towards values?’, 2 ’is order assessment hard to combine with a critical approach towards authorities?’ and 3 ’is order assessment hard to combine with a critical approach towards rules?’. The thesis of the paper is that order assessment is hard to combine with moral autonomy. / Den här uppsatsen i utbildningsfilosofi behandlar ordningsomdömen i relation till moralisk självständighet, vilket är ett sätt att undervisa elever i moral med syftet att skapa ett självständigt förhållningssätt i moralfrågor. Den huvudsakliga forskningsfrågan är ’är ordningsomdömen svåra att förena med moralisk självständighet?’. För att besvara forskningsfrågan används följande frågeställningar: 1 ’är ordningsomdömen svåra att förena med ett kritiskt förhållningssätt gentemot normer?’, 2 ’är ordningsomdömen svåra att förena med ett kritiskt förhållningssätt gentemot auktoriteter?’ och 3 ’är ordningsomdömen svåra att förena med ett kritiskt förhållningssätt gentemot regler?’. Den tes som drivs i uppsatsen är att ordningsomdömen är svåra att förena med moralisk självständighet.