Skip to main content
PLOS ONE logoLink to PLOS ONE
. 2011 Jun 8;6(6):e20577. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0020577

Imperfect Vaccine Aggravates the Long-Standing Dilemma of Voluntary Vaccination

Bin Wu 1,*, Feng Fu 2,*, Long Wang 1
Editor: Matjaz Perc3
PMCID: PMC3110791  PMID: 21687680

Abstract

Achieving widespread population immunity by voluntary vaccination poses a major challenge for public health administration and practice. The situation is complicated even more by imperfect vaccines. How the vaccine efficacy affects individuals' vaccination behavior has yet to be fully answered. To address this issue, we combine a simple yet effective game theoretic model of vaccination behavior with an epidemiological process. Our analysis shows that, in a population of self-interested individuals, there exists an overshooting of vaccine uptake levels as the effectiveness of vaccination increases. Moreover, when the basic reproductive number, Inline graphic, exceeds a certain threshold, all individuals opt for vaccination for an intermediate region of vaccine efficacy. We further show that increasing effectiveness of vaccination always increases the number of effectively vaccinated individuals and therefore attenuates the epidemic strain. The results suggest that ‘number is traded for efficiency’: although increases in vaccination effectiveness lead to uptake drops due to free-riding effects, the impact of the epidemic can be better mitigated.

Introduction

Preemptive vaccination is the principle strategy for the intervention and control of infectious diseases. However, vaccination represents a long-standing social dilemma for public health administration. On the one hand, compulsory vaccination may result in an infringement of civil rights [1]. On the other hand, voluntary vaccination cannot lead to sufficiently high herd immunity for disease eradication. Thus it often fails to protect populations from epidemics [2], [3], [4], [5].

Traditional epidemiological modeling focuses on the pathway of disease transmission, and often does not take into account human strategic behavior in response to the epidemic [6]. However, it is more plausible to integrate human behavior with the epidemiological process. In this sense, voluntary vaccination itself is a social dilemma: vaccinated individuals can escape from the disease with a cost partly incurred by the vaccine side effects; the unvaccinated can also be protected from the epidemics without paying anything provided the population immunity is in effect. In this case, self-interested individuals attempt to shun vaccination while still benefitting from the herd immunity. Such free-riding may lead to a low vaccination level, failing to eradicate the disease, thus a social dilemma [7], [8]. The framework of game theory properly describes how individuals react when facing a dilemma [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19]. In particular, how the evolutionary outcome of the social dilemma is achieved can be investigated based on the imitation process [20], [21]. Therefore, voluntary vaccination can be studied in this framework and noteworthy there has been an emerging literature of combining epidemiology and game theory [7], [22], [23], [24], [5], [25], [8], [26].

Previous work usually assumes perfect vaccination, i.e., the vaccinated individuals gain perfect immunity against the disease [7], [23], [8]. The effectiveness of vaccination, however, is not Inline graphic, such as measles [27], malaria [28] and HIV [29]. Even though the actual vaccination is perfect, the perceived effectiveness can be not. Questionnaire results have shown the perceived effectiveness is often lower than the actual one [24]. This perceived efficacy of vaccination, influenced by psychological effects, plays a determinant role since individuals adjust their strategic behavior based on perceptions of the vaccine efficacy rather than the actual one [5], [24]. Therefore, imperfect vaccination should be taken into account in the game theoretical analysis of the vaccination behavior [30], [31], [32]. Besides, public concern towards the effectiveness of vaccine is so common that it often leads to massive vaccine avoidance. How vaccine effectiveness affects vaccination level and thus the severity of epidemic outbreak has not yet been fully answered. Motivated by these, we study this problem by a minimal model.

Analysis

For proof of principle, we consider vaccination dynamics in an infinitely large well mixed population. In addition, we assume that individuals have a perfect knowledge on the effectiveness of the vaccination. In this case, there is only one parameter describing both the actual and the perceived effectiveness.

The vaccination game consists of two stages, the yearly vaccination campaign and an epidemic season. During the vaccination campaign, each individual decides whether or not to take vaccination. A vaccinated individual pays a cost Inline graphic while an unvaccinated individual pays nothing. This cost Inline graphic includes the time spent in taking the vaccination as well as its side effects. During the epidemic season, the population can be divided into two parts: one comprises effectively vaccinated individuals, and the rest is composed of unvaccinated individuals and the vaccinated ones whose vaccinations are not effective. Successfully vaccinated individuals are immune to the seasonal disease, and thus have no risk of getting infected. For the remaining individuals, however, they become infected with a probability Inline graphic, where Inline graphic is the frequency of effectively vaccinated individuals. In this case the infected bear a cost by Inline graphic. This cost Inline graphic includes expenses and time for health care as well as mortality. The larger the number of effectively vaccinated individuals is, the less likely an unvaccinated individual gets infected. Thus Inline graphic is decreasing with Inline graphic.

Let the effectiveness of the vaccination be Inline graphic and the vaccine uptake level be Inline graphic. The frequency of the effectively vaccinated individuals is Inline graphic. The fraction of the vaccinated and healthy individuals is Inline graphic, which is composed of two parts: these effectively vaccinated individuals (with frequency Inline graphic) and those ineffectively vaccinated individuals (with frequency Inline graphic) who are free from the infection (with frequency Inline graphic). In this case, each effectively vaccinated individual gets payoff Inline graphic. In analogy to this, the frequencies and payoffs for different individuals are given by Table 1.

Table 1. The fraction and the payoff for the four types of individuals in the population.

Vaccinated & Healthy Vaccinated & Infected Unvaccinated & Healthy Unvaccinated & Infected
Fraction Inline graphic Inline graphic Inline graphic Inline graphic
Payoff Inline graphic Inline graphic Inline graphic Inline graphic

They are the vaccinated and healthy, the unvaccinated and healthy, the vaccinated and infected and the unvaccinated and infected.

When the epidemic season ends, i.e., the average abundance of infected individuals does not change, individuals adjust their strategies by imitation where successful individual's strategy is more likely to be followed [33], [34]. Here we employ the Fermi update rule to characterize such an imitation process [35], [36], [8], [37], [38]: two individuals Inline graphic and Inline graphic are selected randomly; Inline graphic learns to behave like Inline graphic with probability

graphic file with name pone.0020577.e031.jpg (1)

where Inline graphic and Inline graphic are the perceived payoffs for Inline graphic and Inline graphic, and Inline graphic is the selection intensity indicating how strongly individuals are responsive to payoff difference.

The dynamics of the vaccination is governed by [20], [39]

graphic file with name pone.0020577.e037.jpg (2)

It has been suggested that the selection intensity for human imitation is rather weak [21], [34], i.e. Inline graphic is sufficiently small. We perform the Taylor expansion of the r.h.s of Eq. (2) in the vicinity of Inline graphic, then after a time rescaling which does not change the dynamics, Eq. (2) can be captured by a much more simple form

graphic file with name pone.0020577.e040.jpg (3)

In what follows, we investigate how the vaccine uptake evolves by Eq. (3) for general function of infection risk Inline graphic. To this end, we focus on how the effectiveness of vaccination has an impact on the the collective outcome of vaccination behavior and the effective vaccination level. Then we incorporate an epidemic dynamics to obtain a specific infection function. Based on this, we provide precise predictions for the two problems. Besides we also study how the effectiveness affects the final epidemic size in this case.

General infection function

For a general function of infection risk Inline graphic, when Inline graphic is valid for all Inline graphic lying between zero and one, no one would take vaccination in the long run, i.e. Inline graphic is the unique stable equilibrium for Eq. (3). Since Inline graphic is a decreasing function, Inline graphic is sufficient to ensure Inline graphic. In analogy to this, when Inline graphic is valid, the entire population ends up with full vaccination, i.e. Inline graphic is the unique stable equilibrium. For Inline graphic fulfilling Inline graphic and Inline graphic, by the monotonicity of Inline graphic in Inline graphic, there is a unique internal equilibrium,

graphic file with name pone.0020577.e056.jpg (4)

Further, Inline graphic is decreasing, the derivative at Inline graphic, namely Inline graphic, is negative. Thus Inline graphic is stable, indicating the coexistence of the vaccinated and the unvaccinated. To show how Inline graphic is affected by Inline graphic requires the exact form of the function of infection risk. We will address it later.

The effective level of vaccination reads

graphic file with name pone.0020577.e063.jpg
graphic file with name pone.0020577.e064.jpg (5)

By Eq. (5), Inline graphic is an increasing function of the effectiveness, Inline graphic. In other words, the effectively vaccinated level always increases with vaccine efficacy. This result only requires that Inline graphic decreases with Inline graphic. This is true for most, if not all, known infection functions [22], [23]. Therefore our predictions are robust with respect to variations in specific infection functions.

A specific infection function

In order to give precise predictions, we adopt a simple Susceptible-Infected-Recovered (SIR) model with demographical effects as presented in [7]. In this model, the population is divided into three different compartments: susceptible, who are healthy but can catch the disease if exposed to infected individuals; Infective, who are infected and can pass the disease on to others; Recovered, who are recovered from the infection and gain immunity against the disease. The time evolution of the population states is governed by the following equations

graphic file with name pone.0020577.e069.jpg (6)
graphic file with name pone.0020577.e070.jpg (7)
graphic file with name pone.0020577.e071.jpg (8)

where Inline graphic is the birth rate and equal to the mortality rate (for simplicity, we only consider constant population size), Inline graphic is the transmission rate, Inline graphic is the recovery rate, and Inline graphic is the fraction of effectively vaccinated individuals among newborns.

From Eq. (7), we derive the basic reproduction ratio Inline graphic: if Inline graphic, the time derivative of Inline graphic is negative, suggesting that the disease cannot persist in the population. The equilibrium state of the population consists of Inline graphic, with Inline graphic, Inline graphic and Inline graphic. By setting Inline graphic, we obtain the herd immunity needed to eradicate the disease, Inline graphic.

Based on this stationary equilibrium, we calculate the probability that an unvaccinated individual gets infected in her life time. The waiting time to acquire infection follows an exponential distributions with rate Inline graphic, and so does the waiting time to death but with rate Inline graphic. Since infection and death are two independent processes, the probability that infection occurs before death event is the relative ratio of intensities, Inline graphic. This probability gives the infection risk of an unvaccinated individual, namely, Inline graphic which is a function of the population level of effective vaccine uptake Inline graphic and holds for Inline graphic. When Inline graphic, Inline graphic, i.e. the disease will be eradicated provided the effective level of vaccination exceeds the critical point Inline graphic. Thus we have

graphic file with name pone.0020577.e094.jpg (9)

Taking this specific infection function Eq. (9) into Eq. (3), we present the full dynamics analysis of the evolution of vaccination behavior in the long run (see Fig. 1). Let the ratio of the vaccination cost versus the infection cost Inline graphic be Inline graphic. We have (For details, see Text S1)

Figure 1. The vaccination behavior on the basic reproductive ratio Inline graphic and the effectiveness Inline graphic.

Figure 1

Here Inline graphic, where Inline graphic. See main text for details.

Case Inline graphic: when Inline graphic, all are unvaccinated for Inline graphic.

Case Inline graphic: when Inline graphic; if Inline graphic, all are unvaccinated, otherwise there is a unique internal stable equilibrium Inline graphic.

Case Inline graphic: when Inline graphic; if Inline graphic, all are unvaccinated, if Inline graphic, there is a unique internal stable equilibrium Inline graphic, if Inline graphic, all are vaccinated, if Inline graphic, there is a unique internal stable equilibrium Inline graphic.

Where Inline graphic, Inline graphic.

Case Inline graphic indicates that for a mild epidemic, Inline graphic, vaccination behavior is impossible for any vaccination effectiveness. For a more serious epidemic, Case Inline graphic shows, however, there is an overshooting of vaccine uptake: the coexistence of the vaccinated and the unvaccinated emerges as the effectiveness exceeds a threshold. Furthermore, interestingly, the increase in effectiveness does not always promote the vaccination behavior (see the upper panel of Fig. 2). Intuitively, for the vaccinated, increasing the vaccination effectiveness does reduce the infection probability. For the unvaccinated, however, this leads to that they are protected by a even more effective herd immunity. Thus increasing the effectiveness of vaccination is beneficial both to the vaccinated and to the unvaccinated. The two strategies compete with each other and the more beneficial one is more likely to spread through imitation. The result shows, when the effectiveness is below the critical value, the more beneficial one is the vaccinated. When it exceeds the critical value, the more beneficial one is the unvaccinated. Mathematically, the non-monotonicity of Inline graphic on Inline graphic is induced from the non-monotonicity of Inline graphic as discussed above. For an even more serious epidemic, Case Inline graphic, the dynamics of the vaccination behavior is qualitatively identical to that of Case Inline graphic. However, in contrast with Case Inline graphic, full vaccination can be reached (see the upper panel of Fig. 3).

Figure 2. Fractions of the vaccinated and the effective vaccinated for a disease with a moderate infectiveness.

Figure 2

The upper panel shows the stationary frequency of the vaccinated with respective to the effectiveness. No one takes vaccination until it is sufficiently efficient, Inline graphic. Then the vaccine uptake level increases with the effectiveness. When the effectiveness exceeds a threshold, Inline graphic, however, the vaccination level decreases with the effectiveness. The lower panel shows the stationary abundance of the effectively vaccinated individuals with respect to the effectiveness. It is shown the efficient vaccinated individual increases with the effectiveness all the time. Thus the behavior of vaccination and the impact of the vaccination against epidemic are not in agreement: for high effectiveness, even though vaccination rate is decreasing, the number of effectively vaccinated individual increases as the effectiveness Inline graphic increases. Here Inline graphic, Inline graphic satisfying Inline graphic.

Figure 3. Fractions of the vaccinated and the effective vaccinated for a serious disease.

Figure 3

The upper panel shows the stationary frequency of the vaccinated with respective to the effectiveness. Compared to Fig. (2), the whole population could take vaccination provided the effectiveness is moderate, Inline graphic. The lower panel indicates the stationary abundance of the effectively vaccinated individuals with respect to the effectiveness. Compared with Fig. (2), the frequency of the effective vaccinated individual also increases with the effectiveness, but it is higher than that of Fig. (2). Here Inline graphic, Inline graphic satisfying Inline graphic.

Besides the vaccination behavior, by taking Eq. (9) into Eq. (5), the effective vaccination frequency, Inline graphic is given by

graphic file with name pone.0020577.e138.jpg (10)

Hence, the effective vaccination frequency increases as the effectiveness increases as predicted (See the lower panels of Figs. 2 and 3).

Further, it is of interest to investigate how the final epidemic size is influenced by the effectiveness of the vaccination. The final epidemic size Inline graphic here refers to the average fraction of the infected individuals at the end of the epidemics. For the SIR model with vital dynamics discussed above, when the vaccine uptake reaches a stationary level Inline graphic, the final epidemics size of the population is given by

graphic file with name pone.0020577.e141.jpg (11)

Therefore, Inline graphic is a decreasing function with Inline graphic. That is to say, the more effective the vaccination is, the smaller proportion is infected eventually. In particular, we find this is true for the flu and the measles (see Fig. 4).

Figure 4. Final epidemic size Inline graphic for the flu and the measles.

Figure 4

The final epidemic size here is the average abundance of the infected individual in the long run. For both the flu and the measles, the final epidemic size decreases with the effectiveness. Here Inline graphic is the birth rate of the population. For the measles, Inline graphic, Inline graphic and Inline graphic; For the flu Inline graphic, Inline graphic and Inline graphic [6], [7].

Discussion

Voluntary vaccination is the principle strategy to control epidemic outbreaks. Vaccination itself, however, is a social dilemma [8]. Evolutionary game theory, which describes the evolution of strategies in self-interested individuals, is a powerful mathematical framework to study such social dilemmas. Most previous works employing this framework are based on the assumption of perfect vaccination, where epidemics can be eradicated from the vaccinated. The vaccination, however, cannot be so effective [27], [28], [29]. Therefore it is of interest to ask how the effectiveness of the vaccination has an impact on the vaccination.

To this end, we combine the SIR model with the imitation dynamics. For the spreading of disease, we find that increasing the effectiveness of vaccination always inhibits the prevalence of epidemics. Therefore imperfect vaccine aggravates the long-standing dilemma of voluntary vaccination. Thus to control the epidemics, i.e. to enhance the vaccination effectiveness, there are two ways: one is to improve technology in vaccine: increasing the actual effectiveness of the vaccination. The other is to make use of media: enhancing the perceived effectiveness.

For the vaccination behavior, we find that when the epidemic is sufficiently serious, all the self-interested individuals may take vaccination for an intermediate vaccine efficacy. In other words, increasing effectiveness inhibits the prevalence of the epidemic with a declining vaccination level. For example when Inline graphic is larger than Inline graphic in Fig. 2 and larger than Inline graphic in Fig. 3. This suggests even though the vaccination level decreases with effectiveness sometime, the epidemic is still better controlled than before, thus it is not necessary to be panic. Besides, all the above results are robust to general imitation processes [34].

Here we study the simplest possible case, i.e., well-mixed populations, for proof of principle. A natural extension of the present analysis is to take population structure into account. For instance, we can consider spatial structure, which restricts the neighborhood of individuals whom one can infect or imitate. In doing so, however, the evolutionary dynamics of vaccination behavior become more complex and require separate, in-depth studies. In essence, the vaccination game is similar to the well-studied snowdrift game [40]. Therefore, spatial structure acts as a “double-edged sword” [8]. In particular, spatial structure promotes vaccination behavior for small vaccination costs, and thus we expect that the critical efficacy of vaccination above which vaccination behavior persists should be smaller compared to the well-mixed case. These extensions are promising areas for future research.

Supporting Information

Text S1

Dynamics analysis.

(PDF)

Acknowledgments

We thank D. Zhou and J. Wang for comments on an early version of this manuscript.

Footnotes

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Funding: The authors acknowledge support by the National Natural Science Foundation of China Grants No. 10972002 and No. 60736022. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Colgrave J. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press; 2006. State of immunity: the politics of vaccination in twentieth-century America. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Fine P, Clarkson J. Individual versus public priorities in the determination of optimal vaccination polices. Am J Epidemiol. 1986;124:1012–1020. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a114471. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Bauch CT, Galvani AP, Earn DJD. Group interest versus self interest in smallpox vaccination policy. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2003;100:10564–10567. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1731324100. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Jansen VA, Stollenwerk N, Jensen HJ, Ramsay ME, Edmunds W, et al. Measles outbreaks in a population with declining vaccine uptake. Science. 2003;301:804. doi: 10.1126/science.1086726. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Basua S, Chapmanb GB, Galvania AP. Integrating epidemiology, psychology, and economics to achieve hpv vaccination targets. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2008;105:19018–19023. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0808114105. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Anderson RM, May RM. Infectious disease of humans. Oxford University Press. 1991.
  • 7.Bauch CT, Earn DJD. Vaccination and the theory of games. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2004;101:13391–13394. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0403823101. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Fu F, Rosenbloom DI, Wang L, Nowak MA. Imitation dynamics of vaccination behaviour on social networks. Proc R Soc B. 2010;278:42–49. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2010.1107. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Nowak MA. Evolutionary Dynamics. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. 2006.
  • 10.Traulsen A, Nowak MA. Chromodynamics of cooperation in finite populations. PLoS ONE. 2007;2:e270. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0000270. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Brown SP, Taddei F. The durability of public goods changes the dynamics and nature of social dilemmas. PLoS ONE. 2007;2(7):e593. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0000593. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Poncela J, Gómez-Gardeñes J, Floría LM, Sánchez A, Moreno Y. Complex cooperative networks from evolutionary preferential attachment. PLoS ONE. 2008;3:e2449. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0002449. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.van Boven M, Klinkenberg D, Pen I, Weissing FJ, Heesterbeek H. Self-interest versus group- interest in antiviral control. PLoS ONE. 2008;3(2):e1558. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0001558. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Perc M, Wang Z. Heterogeneous aspirations promote cooperation in the prisoner's dilemma game. PLoS ONE. 2010;5(12):e15117. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0015117. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Zhang BY, Cressman R, Tao Y. Cooperation and stability through periodic impulses. PLoS ONE. 2010;5(3):e9882. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0009882. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Szolnoki A, Szabó G, Perc M. Phase diagrams for the spatial public goods game with pool-punishment. Phys Rev E. 2011;83:036101. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevE.83.036101. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Wang Z, Murks A, Du WB, Rong ZH, Perc M. Coveting thy neighbors fitness as a means to resolve social dilemmas. J Theor Biol. 2011;277:19–26. doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2011.02.016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Szolnoki A, Perc M. Reward and cooperation in the spatial public goods game. Europhys Lett. 2010;92:38003. [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Perc M, Szolnoki A. Coevolutionary games-a mini review. Biosystems. 2010;99:109–125. doi: 10.1016/j.biosystems.2009.10.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Traulsen A, Nowak MA, Pacheco JM. Stochastic dynamics of invasion and fixation. Phys Rev E. 2006;74:011909. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevE.74.011909. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Traulsen A, Semmann D, Sommerfeld RD, Krambeck HJ, Milinski M. Human strategy updating in evolutionary games. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2010;107:2962–2966. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0912515107. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Bauch CT. Imitation dynamics predict vaccination behavior. Proc R Soc B. 2005;272:1669–1675. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2005.3153. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Vardavas R, Breban R, Blower S. Can influenza epidemics be prevented by voluntary vaccination? PLoS Comput Biol. 2007;3:e85. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.0030085. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Galvani AP, Reluga TC, Chapman GB. Long-standing influenza vaccination policy is in accord with individual self-interest but not with the utilitarian optimum. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2007;104:5692–5697. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0606774104. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Perisic A, Bauch CT. Social contact networks and disease eradicability under voluntary vaccination. PLoS Comput Biol. 2009;5:e1000280. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000280. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Bauch CT, Bhattacharyya S, Ball RF. Rapid emergence of free-riding behavior in new pediatric immunization programs. PLoS ONE. 2010;5(9):e12594. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0012594. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Sudfeld CR, Navar AM, Halsey NA. Effectiveness of measles vaccination and vitamin a treatment. Int J Epidemiol. 2010;39:48–55. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyq021. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Hoffman SL, editor. Washington, DC: American Society of Microbiology; 1996. Malaria vaccine development: a multiimmune response approach. [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Mclean AR, Blower SM. Imperfect vaccines and herd immunity to hiv. Proc R Soc B. 1993;253:9–13. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1993.0075. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Chen FH. A susceptible-infected epidemic model with voluntary vaccinations. J Math Biol. 2006;53:253–272. doi: 10.1007/s00285-006-0006-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Reluga T, Galvani A. A general approach to population games with application to vaccination. Accepted by Mathematical Biosciences. 2011. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • 32.Cornforth M, Reluga TC, Shim E, Bauch CT, Galvani AP, et al. Erratic flu vaccination emerges from short-sighted behaviour in contact networks. PLoS Comput Biol. 2011;7:e1001062. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1001062. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Traulsen A, Claussen JC, Hauert C. Coevolutionary dynamics: From finite to infinite populations. Phys Rev Lett. 2005;95:238701. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.238701. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Wu B, Altrock PM, Wang L, Traulsen A. Universality of weak selection. Phys Rev E. 2010;82:046106. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevE.82.046106. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Blume LE. The statistical mechanics of strategic interaction. Games Econ Behav. 1993;5:387–424. [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Szabó G, Tőke C. Evolutionary Prisoner's Dilemma game on a square lattice. Phys Rev E. 1998;58:69. [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Perc M. Coherence resonance in a spatial prisoner's dilemma game. New J Phys. 2006;8:22–33. [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Szolnoki A, Perc M, Szabó G. Topology-independent impact of noise on cooperation in spatial public goods games. Phys Rev E. 2009;80:056109. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevE.80.056109. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Wu B, Zhou D, Fu F, Luo Q, Wang L, et al. Evolution of cooperation on stochastic dynamical networks. PLoS ONE. 2010;5:e11187. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0011187. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Hauert C, Doebeli M. Spatial structure often inhibits the evolution of cooperation in the snowdrift game. Nature. 2004;428:643–646. doi: 10.1038/nature02360. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Text S1

Dynamics analysis.

(PDF)


Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

RESOURCES