Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

The Hi-Lo Paradox, from Beyond Individual Choice: Teams and Frames in Game Theory
[Beyond Individual Choice: Teams and Frames in Game Theory]

Contents:

Author Info

  • Michael Bacharach

    (Bounded Rationality in Economic Behavior Research Unit, Oxford University)

Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    Game theory is central to modern understandings of how people deal with problems of coordination and cooperation. Yet, ironically, it cannot give a straightforward explanation of some of the simplest forms of human coordination and cooperation--most famously, that people can use the apparently arbitrary features of "focal points" to solve coordination problems, and that people sometimes cooperate in "prisoner's dilemmas." Addressing a wide readership of economists, sociologists, psychologists, and philosophers, Michael Bacharach here proposes a revision of game theory that resolves these long-standing problems. In the classical tradition of game theory, Bacharach models human beings as rational actors, but he revises the standard definition of rationality to incorporate two major new ideas. He enlarges the model of a game so that it includes the ways agents describe to themselves (or "frame") their decision problems. And he allows the possibility that people reason as members of groups (or "teams"), each taking herself to have reason to perform her component of the combination of actions that best achieves the group's common goal. Bacharach shows that certain tendencies for individuals to engage in team reasoning are consistent with recent findings in social psychology and evolutionary biology. As the culmination of Bacharach's long-standing program of pathbreaking work on the foundations of game theory, this book has been eagerly awaited. Following Bacharach's premature death, Natalie Gold and Robert Sugden edited the unfinished work and added two substantial chapters that allow the book to be read as a coherent whole.

    Download Info

    If 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.
    File URL: http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/s8174.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Bibliographic Info

    as in new window

    This chapter was published in: Natalie Gold & Robert Sugden (ed.) , , pages , 2006.

    This item is provided by Princeton University Press in its series Introductory Chapters with number 8174-1.

    Handle: RePEc:pup:chapts:8174-1

    Contact details of provider:
    Web page: http://press.princeton.edu

    Related research

    Keywords: coordination; cooperation; focal points; prisoner's dilemma; rational actors; decision problems; psychology; evolutionary biology;

    Find related papers by JEL classification:

    References

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    Citations

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

    Cited by:
    1. Franz Dietrich & Christian List, 2013. "Where do preferences come from?," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 613-637, August.
    2. Onyeka Osuji, 2011. "Fluidity of Regulation-CSR Nexus: The Multinational Corporate Corruption Example," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 103(1), pages 31-57, September.

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pup:chapts:8174-1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Webmaster).

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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