IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/mpifgd/952.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Der Nutzen unvollständiger Erklärungen: Überlegungen zur sozialwissenschaftlichen Anwendung der Spieltheorie

Author

Listed:
  • Zintl, Reinhard

Abstract

Daß die Spieltheorie auf die Realität nicht völlig oder nicht direkt anwendbar ist, ist bekannt. Es wird nicht nur von Skeptikern betont, sondern auch von Spieltheoretikern regelmäßig mindestens eingeräumt. Nicht völlig oder nicht direkt ist nicht dasselbe wie überhaupt nicht - auch das ist klar. Offen ist aber, was nun in welcher Weise anwendbar sein kann: Sind es nur Ausschnitte der Spieltheorie, die auf reale Prozesse anwendbar sind? Oder ist die Spieltheorie nur auf Ausschnitte der Realität anwendbar? Oder sind zunächst spezifische Transformationen notwendig? Oder geht es einfach um pauschale Abstriche? Oder von allem ein bißchen? Die Antwort lautet wie immer in solchen Fällen: Es kommt darauf an. In den folgenden Überlegungen möchte ich ein wenig genauer darauf eingehen, worauf es ankommt.

Suggested Citation

  • Zintl, Reinhard, 1995. "Der Nutzen unvollständiger Erklärungen: Überlegungen zur sozialwissenschaftlichen Anwendung der Spieltheorie," MPIfG Discussion Paper 95/2, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:mpifgd:952
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/43743/1/189103175.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Scharpf, Fritz W., 1990. "Games Real Actors Could Play: The Problem of Connectedness," MPIfG Discussion Paper 90/8, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    2. Fritz W. Scharpf, 1990. "Games Real Actors Could Play," Rationality and Society, , vol. 2(4), pages 471-494, October.
    3. Robert Sugden, 1993. "Normative judgments and spontaneous order: The contractarian element in Hayek's thought," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 4(3), pages 393-424, September.
    4. Thaler, Richard H, 1988. "The Ultimatum Game," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 2(4), pages 195-206, Fall.
    5. James Buchanan, 1990. "The domain of constitutional economics," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 1-18, December.
    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. Scharpf, Fritz W. & Mohr, Matthias, 1994. "Efficient self-coordination in policy networks: A simulation study," MPIfG Discussion Paper 94/1, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    2. Bruno S. Frey, 1991. "Demand for, and Supply of, Institutions," Rationality and Society, , vol. 3(2), pages 258-260, April.
    3. Fritz W. Scharpf, 1991. "Games Real Actors Could Play: The Challenge of Complexity," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 3(3), pages 277-304, July.
    4. Steven J. Brams, 1991. "Comments on Scharpf's “Games Real Actors could Playâ€," Rationality and Society, , vol. 3(2), pages 252-257, April.
    5. Niclas Berggren, 2009. "Choosing one’s own informal institutions: on Hayek’s critique of Keynes’s immoralism," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 139-159, June.
    6. Benz, Arthur, 1991. "Mehr-Ebenen-Verflechtung: Politische Prozesse in verbundenen Entscheidungsarenen," MPIfG Discussion Paper 91/1, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    7. Benz, Arthur & Scharpf, Fritz W. & Zintl, Reinhard, 1992. "Horizontale Politikverflechtung: Zur Theorie von Verhandlungssystemen," Schriften aus dem Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung Köln, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, volume 10, number 10.
    8. Fritz W. Scharpf, 1994. "Games Real Actors Could Play," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 6(1), pages 27-53, January.
    9. Zintl, Reinhard, 1991. "Kooperation und die Aufteilung des Kooperationsgewinns bei horizontaler Politikverflechtung," MPIfG Discussion Paper 91/6, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    10. Scharpf, Fritz W., 1993. "Positive und negative Koordination in Verhandlungssystemen," MPIfG Discussion Paper 93/1, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    11. Michael Hechter, 1992. "The Insufficiency of Game Theory for the Resolution of Real-World Collective Action Problems," Rationality and Society, , vol. 4(1), pages 33-40, January.
    12. Michael Hechter & Satoshi Kanazawa, 1993. "Group Solidarity and Social Order in Japan," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 5(4), pages 455-493, October.
    13. Roland Kirstein & Matthias Peiss, 2013. "Quantitative Machtkonzepte in der Ökonomik," FEMM Working Papers 130004, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management.
    14. Frimpong Boamah, Emmanuel, 2018. "Constitutional economics of Ghana’s decentralization," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 256-267.
    15. Gale, John & Binmore, Kenneth G. & Samuelson, Larry, 1995. "Learning to be imperfect: The ultimatum game," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 56-90.
    16. Fiori Stefano, 2005. "The emergence of instructions : some open problems in Hayek's theory," CESMEP Working Papers 200504, University of Turin.
    17. Timothy Johnson, 2015. "Reciprocity as a Foundation of Financial Economics," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 131(1), pages 43-67, September.
    18. Viktor J. Vanberg, 2023. "Liberalism and democracy: legitimacy and institutional expediency," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 195(3), pages 251-268, June.
    19. Randall G. Holcombe, 2020. "James M. Buchanan’s constitutional project: past and future," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 183(3), pages 371-387, June.
    20. Handgraaf, Michel J.J. & Dijk, Eric van & Wilke, Henk A.M. & Vermunt, Riel C., 2004. "Evaluability of outcomes in ultimatum bargaining," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 95(1), pages 97-106, September.

    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:zbw:mpifgd:952. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/mpigfde.html .

    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.