Schelling's Game Theory: How to Make Decisions

By Robert V. Dodge | Go to book overview
Save to active project

CHAPTER 12
The Prisoner’s Dilemma

The Prisoner’s Dilemma is the best-known game in game theory and a model with wide-ranging applications. It has become a generic phrase for the competition between individual self-interest and group motivation, but the game represents a direct challenge to basic assumptions of classical market economics. Adam Smith taught that through pure competition “the invisible hand” of the marketplace would guide the factors of supply and demand so that goods and services were produced most efficiently at the lowest price. The Prisoner’s Dilemma questions whether that is necessarily the case. Examples of the Prisoner’s Dilemma can be seen in social interaction of all kinds. In this seemingly simple game, players have two choices: to cooperate, or not. In game theory, the term used for choosing to not cooperate is “defect.”

Cooperating involves trust, and this makes the game complex. The Prisoner’s Dilemma was first developed in 1950 at the RAND Corporation. John Nash had made an important discovery related to non-zero-sum games, those games where player’s interests are not in complete opposition. Now known as the Nash equilibrium (Chapter 20), it involves proof of the existence of equilibrium points in every game. These equilibrium points are outcomes where the players have no incentive to change their decision.

Merrill Flood and Melvin Dresher developed a game to see whether people who had no knowledge of equilibrium points would tend to select these outcomes when they played a game. Armen Alchian of UCLA and John D. Williams of RAND played a game with each other repeatedly, using a simple two-by-two matrix where each could choose to cooperate or defect (Table 12.1).

The game is shown in Table 12.1.

This game has only one Nash equilibrium, or supposedly rational outcome where neither player would change his decision. It is the lower left quadrant. In each of the other quadrants either row or column or both could improve his outcome by changing his choice. The lower left is the stable equilibrium that Nash said always exists, which should be the solution to the non-zero-sum, two-person game. It is a simple and obvious solution, because both players have dominant strategies to follow. However, the upper right quadrant has better payoffs for both players and is the best collective outcome. Was the Nash equilibrium the rational solution to the game?

-137-

Notes for this page

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Notes
Cite this page

Cited page

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited page

Bookmark this page
Schelling's Game Theory: How to Make Decisions
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this book

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen
/ 292

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?