Classical, Modern, and New Game Theory / Klassische, Moderne und Neue Spieltheorie
This paper is a brief history of game theory with its main theme being the nature of the decision makers assumed in the various stages of its historical development. It demonstrates that changes in the “image of man” nourished the developments of what many believe to be progress in game theory. The first stage, classical game theory, is defined by John von Neumann’s and Oskar Morgenstern’s pioneering book “Game Theory and Economic Behavior” which introduced the concept of individual rational players and focuses on conflicting interests. The second stage, modern game theory, is defined by the Nash player who is not only rational but, at least implicitly, assumes that all players are rational to such a degree that players can coordinate their strategies so that a Nash equilibrium prevails. The third stage, new game theory, is defined by the Harsanyi player who is rational but knows very little about the other players, e.g., their payoff functions or the way they form beliefs about other players’ payoff functions or beliefs. The Harsanyi player either plays a highly sophisticated epistemic game on the forming of beliefs or rests content with himself by imitating the observed successful behavior of other agents.
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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 222 (2002)
Issue (Month): 5 (October)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: https://www.degruyter.com|
|Order Information:||Web: https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/jbnst|
References listed on IDEAS
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.:
- Ralf Peters, 1997. "The Stability of Networks: an Evolutionary Approach to Standardization," Homo Oeconomicus, Institute of SocioEconomics, vol. 14, pages 347-355.
- Holler, Manfred J., 1990. "The unprofitability of mixed-strategy equilibria in two-person games : A second folk-theorem," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 319-323, April.
- Battigalli, Pierpaolo, 1997. "On Rationalizability in Extensive Games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 40-61, May.
- Kreps, David M. & Wilson, Robert, 1982.
"Reputation and imperfect information,"
Journal of Economic Theory,
Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 253-279, August.
- Guth, Werner & Huck, Steffen & Ockenfels, Peter, 1996. "Two-Level Ultimatum Bargaining with Incomplete Information: An Experimental Study," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(436), pages 593-604, May.
- Andreas Diekmann, 1985. "Volunteer's Dilemma," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 29(4), pages 605-610, December.
- Binmore, Ken & Morgan, Peter & Snaked, Avner & Sutton, John, 1991. "Do people exploit their bargaining power? An experimental study," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 295-322, August.
- Reinhard Selten & Axel Ostmann, 2001.
Institute of SocioEconomics, vol. 18, pages 111-149.
- George J. Mailath, 1998.
"Do People Play Nash Equilibrium? Lessons from Evolutionary Game Theory,"
Journal of Economic Literature,
American Economic Association, vol. 36(3), pages 1347-1374, September.
- George J. Mailath, "undated". ""Do People Play Nash Equilibrium? Lessons From Evolutionary Game Theory''," CARESS Working Papres 98-01, University of Pennsylvania Center for Analytic Research and Economics in the Social Sciences.
- Joachim Frohn & Werner G³th & Hartmut Kliemt & Reinhard Selten, 2001. "Editors' Introduction to "Making Choices I"," Homo Oeconomicus, Institute of SocioEconomics, vol. 18, pages 1-17.
- Machina, Mark J, 1987. "Choice under Uncertainty: Problems Solved and Unsolved," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 1(1), pages 121-154, Summer.
- Samuelson, Larry & Zhang, Jianbo, 1992. "Evolutionary stability in asymmetric games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 363-391, August.
- Roger Sherman & Thomas D. Willett, 1967. "Potential Entrants Discourage Entry," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 75, pages 400-400.
- Rubinstein, Ariel, 1982.
"Perfect Equilibrium in a Bargaining Model,"
Econometric Society, vol. 50(1), pages 97-109, January.
- Battigalli, Pierpaolo & Siniscalchi, Marciano, 1999.
"Hierarchies of Conditional Beliefs and Interactive Epistemology in Dynamic Games,"
Journal of Economic Theory,
Elsevier, vol. 88(1), pages 188-230, September.
- Pierpaolo Battigalli, "undated". "Hierarchies of Conditional Beliefs and Interactive Epistemology in Dynamic Games," Working Papers 111, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
- Robert J. Aumann, 1999. "Interactive epistemology I: Knowledge," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 28(3), pages 263-300.
- In-Koo Cho & David M. Kreps, 1997.
"Signaling Games and Stable Equilibria,"
Levine's Working Paper Archive
896, David K. Levine.
- George J. Mailath, 1998. "Corrigenda [Do People Play Nash Equilibrium? Lessons from Evolutionary Game Theory]," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(4), pages 1941-1941, December.
- Bruno S. Frey & Manfred J. Holler, 1998. "Tax Compliance Policy Reconsidered," Homo Oeconomicus, Institute of SocioEconomics, vol. 15, pages 27-45.
- Aumann, Robert & Brandenburger, Adam, 1995.
"Epistemic Conditions for Nash Equilibrium,"
Econometric Society, vol. 63(5), pages 1161-1180, September.
- D. B. Bernheim, 2010.
"Rationalizable Strategic Behavior,"
Levine's Working Paper Archive
661465000000000381, David K. Levine.
- Schwalbe, Ulrich & Walker, Paul, 2001. "Zermelo and the Early History of Game Theory," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 123-137, January.
- Pearce, David G, 1984. "Rationalizable Strategic Behavior and the Problem of Perfection," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(4), pages 1029-1050, July.
- Ben Polak, 1999. "Epistemic Conditions for Nash Equilibrium, and Common Knowledge of Rationality," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 67(3), pages 673-676, May.
- Bolle, Friedel, 1990. "High reward experiments without high expenditure for the experimenter?," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 157-167, June.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:jns:jbstat:v:222:y:2002:i:5:p:556-583. 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: (Peter Golla)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.