'Testing' game theory
AbstractThis paper considers whether game theory can be tested, what difficulties experimenters face in testing it, and what can be learned from attempts to test it. I emphasize that tests of game theory rely on fallible assumptions concerning particular features of the strategic situation and of the players. These do not render game theory untestable in principle, but they create serious problems. In coping with these problems, experimenters may use game theory to learn what games experimental subjects are playing.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Taylor and Francis Journals in its journal Journal of Economic Methodology.
Volume (Year): 12 (2005)
Issue (Month): 2 ()
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://taylorandfrancis.metapress.com/link.asp?target=journal&id=104715
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Andreoni, James, 1995.
"Cooperation in Public-Goods Experiments: Kindness or Confusion?,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 85(4), pages 891-904, September.
- Hausman,Daniel M., 1992. "The Inexact and Separate Science of Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521415019, November.
- Hausman,Daniel M., 1992. "The Inexact and Separate Science of Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521425230, November.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael McNulty).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.