Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

If you need an accessible version of this item please contact JSTOR User Support

Comments on the Interpretation of Game Theory

Ariel Rubinstein
Econometrica
Vol. 59, No. 4 (Jul., 1991), pp. 909-924
Published by: The Econometric Society
DOI: 10.2307/2938166
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2938166
Page Count: 16
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Download ($10.00)
  • Cite this Item
If you need an accessible version of this item please contact JSTOR User Support
Comments on the Interpretation of Game Theory
Preview not available

Abstract

The paper is a discussion of the interpretation of game theory. Game theory is viewed as an abstract inquiry into the concepts used in social reasoning when dealing with situations of conflict and not as an attempt to predict behavior. The first half of the paper deals with the notion of "strategy." Its principal claim is that the conventional interpretation of a "strategy" is not consistent with the manner in which it is applied, and that this inconsistency frequently results in confusion and misunderstanding. In order to prove this point, the term "strategy" is discussed in three contexts: extensive games in which players have to act more than once in some prespecified order, games normally analyzed using mixed strategies, and games with limited memory. The paper endorses the view that equilibrium strategy describes a player's plan of action, as well as those considerations which support the optimality of his plan rather than being merely a description of a "plan of action." Deviation from the perception of a strategy as a mere "plan of action" fits in well with the interpretation of the notion "game" which is discussed in the second half of this paper. It is argued that a good model in game theory has to be realistic in the sense that it provides a model for the perception of real life social phenomena. It should incorporate a description of the relevant factors involved, as perceived by the decision makers. These need not necessarily represent the physical rules of the world. It is not meant to be isomorphic with respect to "reality" but rather with respect to our perception of regular phenomena in reality.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
909
    909
  • Thumbnail: Page 
910
    910
  • Thumbnail: Page 
911
    911
  • Thumbnail: Page 
912
    912
  • Thumbnail: Page 
913
    913
  • Thumbnail: Page 
914
    914
  • Thumbnail: Page 
915
    915
  • Thumbnail: Page 
916
    916
  • Thumbnail: Page 
917
    917
  • Thumbnail: Page 
918
    918
  • Thumbnail: Page 
919
    919
  • Thumbnail: Page 
920
    920
  • Thumbnail: Page 
921
    921
  • Thumbnail: Page 
922
    922
  • Thumbnail: Page 
923
    923
  • Thumbnail: Page 
924
    924