IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/theord/v94y2023i4d10.1007_s11238-022-09907-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Misfit model: irrational deterrence and bounded rationality

Author

Listed:
  • Karl Sörenson

    (KTH - Royal Institute of Technology)

Abstract

Contemporary theories of deterrence place a strong emphasis on coherency between model and theory. Schelling’s contention of irrational threats for successful deterrence abandons the rationality assumption to explain how a player can deter, thereby departing from the standard game theoretic solution concepts. It is a misfit model in relation to a deterrence theory and, therefore, excluded. The article defends and remodels Schelling’s intuition by employing the level-k model. It is shown that an unsophisticated player that randomizes over its strategies brings about an advantageous outcome. The model also shows that the belief that a player randomizes has the same deterrent effect, as an actual stochastic choice, like Schelling suggested. While this means Schelling’s idea can be saved, it is still problematic how we should view contributions of bounded rationality in relation to current deterrence theory. The article suggests that separating the purpose of a model in conjunction with allowing other scientific ideals than model-theory coherence permits a broader and philosophically sounder approach.

Suggested Citation

  • Karl Sörenson, 2023. "A Misfit model: irrational deterrence and bounded rationality," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 94(4), pages 575-591, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:theord:v:94:y:2023:i:4:d:10.1007_s11238-022-09907-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s11238-022-09907-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11238-022-09907-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11238-022-09907-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Luca Lambertini, 2013. "Joining The Nuke Club: A Forward Induction Approach," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(1), pages 15-21, February.
    2. Vincent P. Crawford & Miguel A. Costa-Gomes & Nagore Iriberri, 2013. "Structural Models of Nonequilibrium Strategic Thinking: Theory, Evidence, and Applications," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 51(1), pages 5-62, March.
    3. Vincent P. Crawford, 2003. "Lying for Strategic Advantage: Rational and Boundedly Rational Misrepresentation of Intentions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(1), pages 133-149, March.
    4. Stephen Quackenbush, 2004. "The Rationality of Rational Choice Theory," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(2), pages 87-107, April.
    5. Stephen L. Quackenbush, 2010. "General Deterrence and International Conflict: Testing Perfect Deterrence Theory," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(1), pages 60-85, February.
    6. Stahl Dale O., 1993. "Evolution of Smartn Players," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 604-617, October.
    7. Till Grune-Yanoff & Paul Schweinzer, 2008. "The roles of stories in applying game theory," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(2), pages 131-146.
    8. Alexander J. Field, 2014. "Schelling, von Neumann, and the Event that Didn’t Occur," Games, MDPI, vol. 5(1), pages 1-37, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alaoui, Larbi & Janezic, Katharina A. & Penta, Antonio, 2020. "Reasoning about others' reasoning," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    2. Nagel, Rosemarie & Bühren, Christoph & Frank, Björn, 2017. "Inspired and inspiring: Hervé Moulin and the discovery of the beauty contest game," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 191-207.
    3. Itzhak Rasooly, 2022. "Going...going...wrong: a test of the level-k (and cognitive hierarchy) models of bidding behaviour," Economics Series Working Papers 959, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    4. Blume, Andreas & Lai, Ernest K. & Lim, Wooyoung, 2019. "Eliciting private information with noise: The case of randomized response," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 356-380.
    5. Carlos Alós-Ferrer & Johannes Buckenmaier, 2021. "Cognitive sophistication and deliberation times," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(2), pages 558-592, June.
    6. Itzhak Rasooly, 2021. "Going... going... wrong: a test of the level-k (and cognitive hierarchy) models of bidding behaviour," Papers 2111.05686, arXiv.org.
    7. Vincent P. Crawford, 2016. "New Directions for Modelling Strategic Behavior: Game-Theoretic Models of Communication, Coordination, and Cooperation in Economic Relationships," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 30(4), pages 131-150, Fall.
    8. Hagenbach, Jeanne & Perez-Richet, Eduardo, 2018. "Communication with evidence in the lab," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 139-165.
    9. repec:cup:judgdm:v:15:y:2020:i:2:p:230-245 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Blume, Andreas & Lai, Ernest K. & Lim, Wooyoung, 2023. "Mediated talk: An experiment," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    11. Irenaeus Wolff, 2017. "Lucky Numbers in Simple Games," TWI Research Paper Series 107, Thurgauer Wirtschaftsinstitut, Universität Konstanz.
    12. Marina Sandomirskaia, 2019. "Nash-2 Equilibrium: Selective Farsightedness Under Uncertain Response," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 28(2), pages 275-304, April.
    13. Marina S. Sandomirskaia, 2015. "Price-Quantity Competition of Farsighted Firms: Toughness vs. Collusion," HSE Working papers WP BRP 93/EC/2015, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    14. Mohlin, Erik, 2012. "Evolution of theories of mind," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 299-318.
    15. Li, Ying Xue & Schipper, Burkhard C., 2020. "Strategic reasoning in persuasion games: An experiment," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 329-367.
    16. Daniel H. Wood, 2022. "Communication-Enhancing Vagueness," Games, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-27, June.
    17. de Groot Ruiz, Adrian & Offerman, Theo & Onderstal, Sander, 2015. "Equilibrium selection in experimental cheap talk games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 14-25.
    18. Joshua Zonca & Giorgio Coricelli & Luca Polonio, 2019. "Does exposure to alternative decision rules change gaze patterns and behavioral strategies in games?," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 5(1), pages 14-25, August.
    19. Joshua Zonca & Giorgio Coricelli & Luca Polonio, 2020. "Gaze patterns disclose the link between cognitive reflection and sophistication in strategic interaction," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(2), pages 230-245, March.
    20. Marco Serena, 2017. "A Belief-based Theory for Private Information Games," Working Papers tax-mpg-rps-2018-12, Max Planck Institute for Tax Law and Public Finance.
    21. Karl Wärneryd, 2014. "Observable Strategies, Commitments, and Contracts," CESifo Working Paper Series 5089, CESifo.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:theord:v:94:y:2023:i:4:d:10.1007_s11238-022-09907-7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.