A one-shot Prisoners’ Dilemma with procedural utility
This article introduces a model of rationality that combines procedural utility over actions with consequential utility over payoffs. It applies the model to the Prisoners’ Dilemma and shows that empirically observed cooperative behaviors can be rationally explained by a procedural utility for cooperation. The model characterizes the situations in which cooperation emerges as a Nash equilibrium. When rational individuals are not solely concerned by the consequences of their behavior but also care for the process by which these consequences are obtained, there is no one single rational solution to a Prisoners’ Dilemma. Rational behavior depends on the payoffs at stake and on the procedural utility of individuals. In this manner, this model of procedural utility reflects how ethical considerations, social norms or emotions can transform a game of consequences.
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.:
- Amartya Sen, 1996.
"Maximization and the Act of Choice,"
Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers
1766, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
- Kreps, David M. & Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John & Wilson, Robert, 1982.
"Rational cooperation in the finitely repeated prisoners' dilemma,"
Journal of Economic Theory,
Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 245-252, August.
- David Kreps & Paul Milgrom & John Roberts & Bob Wilson, 2010. "Rational Cooperation in the Finitely Repeated Prisoners' Dilemma," Levine's Working Paper Archive 239, David K. Levine.
- Martin J. Osborne & Ariel Rubinstein, 1994.
"A Course in Game Theory,"
MIT Press Books,
The MIT Press,
edition 1, volume 1, number 0262650401, September.
- Bester, Helmut & Guth, Werner, 1998.
"Is altruism evolutionarily stable?,"
Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization,
Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 193-209, February.
- Gilboa, Itzhak & Schmeidler, David, 1988.
"Information dependent games : Can common sense be common knowledge?,"
Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 215-221.
- Itzhak Gilboa & David Schmeidler, 1988. "Information Dependent Games: Can Common Sense Be Common Knowledge?," Post-Print hal-00753242, HAL.
- Frey, Bruno S. & Stutzer, Alois, 2002.
"Beyond Outcomes: Measuring Procedural Utility,"
Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Working Paper Series
qt7qp9q1js, Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics.
- Martin J. Osborne & Ariel Rubinstein, 1997.
"Games with Procedurally Rational Players,"
Department of Economics Working Papers
1997-02, McMaster University.
- Werlang, Sérgio Ribeiro da Costa, 1988. "Common knowledge," Economics Working Papers (Ensaios Economicos da EPGE) 118, FGV/EPGE Escola Brasileira de Economia e Finanças, Getulio Vargas Foundation (Brazil).
- M. Rabin, 2001.
"Incorporating Fairness into Game Theory and Economics,"
Levine's Working Paper Archive
511, David K. Levine.
- Rabin, Matthew, 1993. "Incorporating Fairness into Game Theory and Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(5), pages 1281-1302, December.
- Matthew Rabin., 1992. "Incorporating Fairness into Game Theory and Economics," Economics Working Papers 92-199, University of California at Berkeley.
- Vogt, Carsten, 2000. "The evolution of cooperation in Prisoners' Dilemma with an endogenous learning mutant," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 347-373, July.
- Loch, Christoph H. & Huberman, Bernardo A. & Stout, Suzanne, 2000. "Status competition and performance in work groups," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 35-55, September.
- Simon, Herbert A, 1978. "Rationality as Process and as Product of Thought," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 68(2), pages 1-16, May.
- Michihiro Kandori, 1992. "Social Norms and Community Enforcement," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 59(1), pages 63-80.
- Marc Le Menestrel, 2001.
"A process approach to the utility for gambling,"
Economics Working Papers
570, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
- Marc Le Menestrel & Luk N. Van Wassenhove, 2001.
"The domain and interpretation of utility functions: An exploration,"
Economics Working Papers
576, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
- Marc Le Menestrel & Luk Van Wassenhove, 2001. "The Domain and Interpretation of Utility Functions: An Exploration," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 51(2), pages 329-349, December.
- Robson, Arthur J, 1992. "Status, the Distribution of Wealth, Private and Social Attitudes to Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(4), pages 837-857, July.
- Hammond, P.J. & , ., 1987. "Consequentialist foundations for expected utility," CORE Discussion Papers 1987016, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:upf:upfgen:819. 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: ()
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.