(Un)Bounded Rationality in Decision Making and Game Theory – Back to Square One?
Game and decision theory start from rather strong premises. Preferences, represented by utilities, beliefs represented by probabilities, common knowledge and symmetric rationality as background assumptions are treated as “given.” A richer language enabling us to capture the process leading to what is “given” seems superior to the stenography of decision making in terms of utility cum probability. However, similar to traditional rational choice modeling, boundedly rational choice modeling, as outlined here, is far from being a “global” theory with empirical content; rather it serves as a tool to formulate “local” theories with empirical content.
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.:
- Werner Güth & M. Vittoria Levati & Matteo Ploner, 2008.
"Satisficing in strategic environments: a theoretical approach and experimental evidence,"
Jena Economic Research Papers
2008-078, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena, Max-Planck-Institute of Economics.
- Güth, Werner & Vittoria Levati, M. & Ploner, Matteo, 2010. "Satisficing in strategic environments: A theoretical approach and experimental evidence," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 554-561, October.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jgames:v:1:y:2010:i:1:p:53-65:d:7584. 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: (XML Conversion Team)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.