IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/compsc/v2y1977i2p171-203.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Deception in 2 × 2 Games

Author

Listed:
  • Steven J. Brams

    (Department of Politics New York University)

Abstract

Deception, which involves the conscious misrepresentation by Deceiver of his preferences to Deceived in a game of incomplete information, is analyzed in 2 × 2 games in which the preferences of players are strictly ordered. The 78 distinct 2 × 2 games are divided into three mutually exclusive classes: 1. Deception-proof (27 percent): Not susceptible to deception by either player. 2. Deception-stable (51 percent): While susceptible to deception by at least one player, neither player can ensure himself of a better outcome through deception. 3. Deception-vulnerable (tacit) (22 percent): At least one player can ensure himself of a better outcome only through deception. In addition, a fourth class of games (35 percent of total). which cuts across classes 2 and 3 above, are shown to be vulnerable to Deceiver who “reveals†himself in the play of a game. Several theorems that characterize and interrelate the four classes and eleven finer categories of 2 × 2 games are proved. The theory is applied to the analysis of the Cuban missile crisis, in which it is suggested that the United States might, paradoxically, have benefited from being deceived by the Soviet Union.

Suggested Citation

  • Steven J. Brams, 1977. "Deception in 2 × 2 Games," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 2(2), pages 171-203, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:compsc:v:2:y:1977:i:2:p:171-203
    DOI: 10.1177/073889427700200201
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/073889427700200201
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/073889427700200201?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John C. Harsanyi, 1967. "Games with Incomplete Information Played by "Bayesian" Players, I-III Part I. The Basic Model," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(3), pages 159-182, November.
    2. Steven J. Brams, 1975. "Newcomb's Problem and Prisoners' Dilemma," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 19(4), pages 596-612, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. DeCanio, Stephen J. & Fremstad, Anders, 2013. "Game theory and climate diplomacy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 177-187.
    2. Jun Zhuang & Vicki M. Bier, 2010. "Reasons for Secrecy and Deception in Homeland‐Security Resource Allocation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(12), pages 1737-1743, December.
    3. Jack Hirshleifer, 1987. "The Analytics of Continuing Conflict," UCLA Economics Working Papers 467A, UCLA Department of Economics.

    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. Martin Meier & Burkhard Schipper, 2014. "Bayesian games with unawareness and unawareness perfection," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 56(2), pages 219-249, June.
    2. Huseyin Cavusoglu & Srinivasan Raghunathan, 2004. "Configuration of Detection Software: A Comparison of Decision and Game Theory Approaches," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 1(3), pages 131-148, September.
    3. Strzalecki, Tomasz, 2014. "Depth of reasoning and higher order beliefs," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 108-122.
    4. Yoo, Seung Han, 2014. "Learning a population distribution," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 188-201.
    5. Olivier Coibion & Yuriy Gorodnichenko & Saten Kumar & Jane Ryngaert, 2021. "Do You Know that I Know that You Know…? Higher-Order Beliefs in Survey Data," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 136(3), pages 1387-1446.
    6. Hausken, Kjell & Levitin, Gregory, 2009. "Minmax defense strategy for complex multi-state systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 577-587.
    7. Yehuda Levy, 2013. "A Cantor Set of Games with No Shift-Homogeneous Equilibrium Selection," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 38(3), pages 492-503, August.
    8. Amanda Friedenberg & H. Jerome Keisler, 2021. "Iterated dominance revisited," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 72(2), pages 377-421, September.
    9. Pintér, Miklós & Udvari, Zsolt, 2011. "Generalized type spaces," MPRA Paper 34107, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Arun G. Chandrasekhar & Robert Townsend & Juan Pablo Xandri, 2018. "Financial Centrality and Liquidity Provision," NBER Working Papers 24406, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Benjamin Patrick Evans & Mikhail Prokopenko, 2021. "Bounded rationality for relaxing best response and mutual consistency: The Quantal Hierarchy model of decision-making," Papers 2106.15844, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2023.
    12. Sundström, David, 2016. "On Specification and Inference in the Econometrics of Public Procurement," Umeå Economic Studies 931, Umeå University, Department of Economics.
    13. Scandizzo, Pasquale L. & Ventura, Marco, 2010. "Sharing risk through concession contracts," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(1), pages 363-370, November.
    14. Tsakas, Elias, 2014. "Epistemic equivalence of extended belief hierarchies," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 126-144.
    15. Waśniewski, Krzysztof, 2012. "Local governments’ fiscal policy as a factor of urban development – evidence from Poland," MPRA Paper 39176, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Estrella Alonso & Joaquin Sanchez-Soriano & Juan Tejada, 2015. "A parametric family of two ranked objects auctions: equilibria and associated risk," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 225(1), pages 141-160, February.
    17. Matata Ponyo Mapon & Jean-Paul K. Tsasa, 2019. "The artefact of the Natural Resources Curse," Papers 1911.09681, arXiv.org.
    18. Can Baskent, 2014. "Some Non-Classical Approaches to the Branderburger-Keisler Paradox," Working Papers hal-01094784, HAL.
    19. repec:cep:stitep:566 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Achille Basile & Maria Graziano & Marialaura Pesce, 2014. "On fairness of equilibria in economies with differential information," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 76(4), pages 573-599, April.
    21. Gilboa, Itzhak & Samuelson, Larry & Schmeidler, David, 2022. "Learning (to disagree?) in large worlds," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:sae:compsc:v:2:y:1977:i:2:p:171-203. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://pss.la.psu.edu/ .

    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.