Skip to main content

General Ordinal 2×2 Games in Arms Control Applications

  • Conference paper
Modelling and Analysis in Arms Control

Part of the book series: NATO ASI Series ((NATO ASI F,volume 26))

  • 103 Accesses

Abstract

The most common model of human behavior employed in game theory is the normal form, introduced by von NEUMANN and MORGENSTERN (1953). An example of a two player, two strategy game (“2×2 game”) in normal form is illustrated in Table 1. This particular game is called “Prisoners’ Dilemma”. The possible outcomes are the four cells of the matrix. Player 1 must choose between row R1 and row R2, while player 2 must choose between column C1 and column C2. If Player 1 chooses R1 while 2 chooses CI, the resulting outcome is the upper left cell of the matrix, which, in Prisoners’ Dilemma, is marked 3,3. The numbers in each cell (called “payoffs”) denote the relative preference of each player for the outcome; the first number is for Player 1 and the second for Player 2. The higher the number, the more preferred the outcome. Thus, the most preferred outcome for Player 1 is represented by the (R2, C1) cell, which is marked 4,1. This is Player 2’s least preferred outcome.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Axelrod, R. (1984): The Evolution of Cooperation. New York: Basic Books

    Google Scholar 

  • Benjamin, C.M. (1981): Developing a Game/Decision Theoretic Approach to Comparative Foreign Policy Analysis: Some Cases in Recent American Foreign Policy. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Southern California

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, P.G. and Dando, M.R. (1977): Fall Gelb and other games: A hyper-game perspective of the fall of France, 1940. Journal of the Conflict Research Society, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 1–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, P.G. and Dando, M.R. (1979): Complex strategic analysis: a hyper-game perspective of the fall of France. Journal of the Operational Research Society, Vol. 30, No. 1, pp. 23–32

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, P.G., Dando, M.R. and Sharp, R.G. (1980): Using hypergames to model difficult social issues: an approach to the case of soccer hooliganism. Journal of the Operational Research Society, Vol. 31, pp. 621–635

    Google Scholar 

  • Brams, S.J. (1977): Deception in 2x2 games. Journal of Peace Science, Vol. 2, pp. 171–203

    Google Scholar 

  • Brams, S.J. (1985): Superpower Games: Applying Game Theory to Superpower Conflicts. New Haven CT: Yale University Press, 1985

    Google Scholar 

  • Brams, S.J. and Davis, M.D. (1983): The verification problem in arms control: a game theoretic analysis, presentation to the Joint National Meeting of the Operations Research Society of America and the Institute of Management Sciences, Orlando, Florida, Nov. 7–9, 1983

    Google Scholar 

  • Brams, S.J. and Wittman, D. (1981): Nonmyopic equilibria in 2x2 games, Conflict Management and Peace Science, 1981, Vol. 6, pp. 39–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, N.M., Benjamin, C.M. and Powell, C.A. (1985): Optimizing the decision process: structure and stability in complex conflict. IS Notes, in press (accepted October, 1985)

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, N.M., Benjamin, C.M. and Powell, C.A. (1985): Optimizing the decision process: structure and stability in complex conflict. Proceedings, Society for General Systems Research International Conference. Los Angeles, May 27–31, 1985, pp. 1061–1070

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, N.M. and Hipel, K.W. (1979): Solving complex conflicts. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, 1979, Vol. SMC-9, pp. 181–185

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, N.M. and Hipel, K.W. (1984): Conflict Analysis: Models and Resolutions. New York: North-Holland, 1984

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, N.M. and Kilgour, D.M. (1985): Nonstrict ordinal 2x2 games: a comprehensive computer assisted analysis of the 726 possibilities. Theory and Decision, in press (accepted October, 1985)

    Google Scholar 

  • Guyer, M. and Hamburger, H. (1968): A note on a ‘Taxonomy of 2x2 Games’, General Systems, 1968, Vol. 13, 205–208

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard, N. (1971): Paradoxes of Rationality. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press, 1971

    Google Scholar 

  • Kilgour, D.M. (1984): Equilibria for far-sighted players, Theory and Decision. 1984, Vol. 16, pp. 135–157

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Kilgour, D.M. and Fraser, N.M. (1985): A taxonomy of all ordinal 2x2 games, Department of Management Sciences, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, 1985

    Google Scholar 

  • Kilgour, D.M., Hipel, K.W. and Fraser, N.M. (1984): Solution concepts in 2x2 games, Large Scale Systems, 1984, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 49–72

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Knight, K. and Powell, C.A. (1974): Metagame theory and the metagame/options analysis technique: A basic introduction and an application: Bandladesh, World Studies, 1974, Vol. 1, No. 1

    Google Scholar 

  • Nash, J.F. (1951): Non-cooperative games, Annals of Mathematics, 1951, Vol. 54, pp. 286–295

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Radford, K.J. and Fingerhut, B. (1980): Analysis of a complex decision situation - the Simpsons/Simpsons-Sears merger proposal. OMEGA, 1980, Vol. 8, No. 4, pp. 221–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rapoport, A. and Chammah, A.M. (1965): Prisoner’s Dilemma. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1965

    Google Scholar 

  • Rapoport, A. and Chammah, A.M. (1966): The game of Chicken. American Behavioral Scientist, 1966, Vol. 10, pp. 23–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rapoport, A., Guyer, M.J. and Gordon, D.G. (1976): The 2x2 Game. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rapoport, A. and Guyer, M.J. (1966): A taxonomy of 2x2 games. General Systems, 1966, Vol. 11, pp. 203–214

    Google Scholar 

  • Snyder, G.H. (1971): Prisoner’s Dilemma and Chicken models in international politics. International Studies Quarterly, 1971, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snyder, G.H. and Diesing, P. (1977): Conflict Among Nations. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1977

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Neumann, J. and Morgenstern, O. (1953): Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. 3rd Edition. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1953

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Zagare, F.C. (1981): Non-myopic equilibria and the Middle East crisis of 1967. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 1981, Vol. 5, pp. 139–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zagare, F.C. (1984): Limited move equilibria in 2x2 games. Theory and Decision, 1984, Vol. 16, pp. 1–19

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Zagare, F.C. (1985): The pathology of unilateral deterrence. Dynamic Models of International Conflict, M.D. Ward and U. Luterbacher, ed. Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Reinner Press, 1985

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1986 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Fraser, N.M. (1986). General Ordinal 2×2 Games in Arms Control Applications. In: Avenhaus, R., Huber, R.K., Kettelle, J.D. (eds) Modelling and Analysis in Arms Control. NATO ASI Series, vol 26. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-82943-7_18

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-82943-7_18

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-82945-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-82943-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics