IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jocore/v22y1978i1p7-38.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fun and Games

Author

Listed:
  • Barry R. Schlenker

    (University of Florida)

  • Thomas V. Bonoma

    (University of Pittsburgh)

Abstract

The validity of gaming techniques has come under increasing attack in recent years The present article examines claims for and criticisms of the use of games in the study of conflict. Gaming proponents have cited four major functions of games: (a) an analogy, or model, of actual conflict situations, (b) a heuristic device to provide new ways of thinking, (c) a device to separate rational solutions to conflict from those affected by psychological and sociological factors, and (d) a simple experimental tool to test theoretically relevant hypotheses about conflict. Critics have attacked the use of games by pointing out (a) the triviality of game results, (b) a possible lack of reproducibility of the findings, (c) the difficulty of relating game choices to motivation, (d) the inappropriateness of many generalizations made from such studies, (e) the nondynamic nature of the game situation, and (f) the lack of isomorphism between game situations and naturally occurnng conflicts. Examination of these advantages and criticisms allowed their differentiation into questions of internal validity, external validity, and ecological (real world) validity The most potent criticisms of games are directed at the ecological validity issue. It is the contention of the present paper that ecological validity raises questions for the evaluation of theories of conflict, not for the evaluation of gaming paradigms that permit the study of conflict.

Suggested Citation

  • Barry R. Schlenker & Thomas V. Bonoma, 1978. "Fun and Games," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 22(1), pages 7-38, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jocore:v:22:y:1978:i:1:p:7-38
    DOI: 10.1177/002200277802200102
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/002200277802200102
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/002200277802200102?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marc Pilisuk & Paul Potter & Anatol Rapoport & J. Alan Winter, 1965. "War Hawks and Peace Doves: alternate resolutions of experimental conflicts," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 9(4), pages 491-508, December.
    2. Harold H. Kelley, 1965. "Experimental studies of threats in interpersonal negotiations," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 9(1), pages 79-105, March.
    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. Marc Pilisuk, 1984. "Experimenting with the Arms Race," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 28(2), pages 296-315, June.
    2. David W. Conrath, 1970. "Experience as a factor in experimental gaming behavior," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 14(2), pages 195-202, June.
    3. Leonardelli, Geoffrey J. & Gu, Jun & McRuer, Geordie & Medvec, Victoria Husted & Galinsky, Adam D., 2019. "Multiple equivalent simultaneous offers (MESOs) reduce the negotiator dilemma: How a choice of first offers increases economic and relational outcomes," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 64-83.
    4. A.V. Subbarao, 1978. "The Impact of Binding Interest Arbitration on Negotiation and Process Outcome," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 22(1), pages 79-103, March.
    5. Luc Reychler, 1979. "The Effectiveness of a Pacifist Strategy in Conflict Resolution," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 23(2), pages 228-260, June.
    6. Marc Pilisuk & Paul Skolnick & Kenneth Thomas & Reuben Chapman, 1967. "Boredom vs. cognitive reappraisal in the development of cooperative strategy," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 11(1), pages 110-116, March.
    7. David E. Kanouse & William M. Wiest, 1967. "Some factors affecting choice in the Prisoner's Dilemma," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 11(2), pages 206-213, June.
    8. John S. Gillis & George T. Woods, 1971. "The 16PF as an indicator of performance in the Prisoner's Dilemma game," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 15(3), pages 393-402, September.
    9. S. Plous, 1985. "Perceptual Illusions and Military Realities," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 29(3), pages 363-389, September.
    10. William M. Evan & John A. MacDougall, 1967. "Interorganizational conflict: a labor-management bargaining experiment," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 11(4), pages 398-413, December.
    11. F. Trenery Dolbear Jr & Lester B. Lave, 1966. "Risk orientation as a predictor in the Prisoner's Dilemma," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 10(4), pages 506-515, December.
    12. William P. Smith & Timothy D. Emmons, 1969. "Outcome information and competitiveness in interpersonal bargaining," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 13(2), pages 262-270, June.
    13. Richard Rosecrance, 1981. "Reward, Punishment, and Interdependence," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 25(1), pages 31-46, March.
    14. Warner Wilson, 1971. "Reciprocation and other techniques for inducing cooperation in the Prisoner's Dilemma game," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 15(2), pages 167-195, June.
    15. Margaret A. Neale & Max H. Bazerman, 1985. "Perspectives for Understanding Negotiation," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 29(1), pages 33-55, March.
    16. V. Edwin Bixenstine & Hazel Blundell, 1966. "Control of choice exerted by structural factors in two-person, non-zero-sum games 1," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 10(4), pages 478-487, December.
    17. Carsten K. W. De Dreu, 1995. "Coercive Power And Concession Making in Bilateral Negotiation," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 39(4), pages 646-670, December.
    18. William M. Knapp & Jerome E. Podell, 1968. "Mental patients, prisoners, and students with simulated partners in a mixed-motive game," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 12(2), pages 235-241, June.
    19. Brian Betz, 1991. "Response to Strategy and Communication in an Arms Race-Disarmament Dilemma," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 35(4), pages 678-690, December.
    20. John Thibaut, 1968. "The development of contractual norms in bargaining: replication and variation," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 12(1), pages 102-112, March.

    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:sae:jocore:v:22:y:1978:i:1:p:7-38. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://pss.la.psu.edu/ .

    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.