IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/soecon/v76y2010i4p1094-1106.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Deadliest of Games: The Institution of Dueling

Author

Listed:
  • Christopher G. Kingston
  • Robert E. Wright

Abstract

Recent historical research indicates that ritualistic dueling had a rational basis. Basically, under certain social and economic conditions, individuals must fight in order to maintain their personal credit and social standing. We use a repeated two‐player sequential game with random matching to show how the institution of dueling could have functioned as a costly but incentive‐compatible means by which individuals could demonstrate their good faith dealings by defending their “honor.”

Suggested Citation

  • Christopher G. Kingston & Robert E. Wright, 2010. "The Deadliest of Games: The Institution of Dueling," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 76(4), pages 1094-1106, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:soecon:v:76:y:2010:i:4:p:1094-1106
    DOI: 10.4284/sej.2010.76.4.1094
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.4284/sej.2010.76.4.1094
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.4284/sej.2010.76.4.1094?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
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Tom Ahn & Paul Shea & Jeremy Sandford, 2023. "Lethality and deterrence in affairs of honor: The case of the Antebellum U.S. South," Rationality and Society, , vol. 35(3), pages 259-292, August.

    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:wly:soecon:v:76:y:2010:i:4:p:1094-1106. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)2325-8012 .

    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.