Skip to main content

The Logic of Team Reasoning

  • Chapter
Teamwork

Abstract

Almost all decision theory presupposes that agency is invested in individuals. Each individual is represented as making decisions in the light of his or her own preferences and beliefs. A person may have preferences about consequences of her actions which affect other people; but these are still her preferences. She may have beliefs about what other people will choose; but these are still her beliefs. In making decisions, she acts alone.

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
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover 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

  • Bacharach, Michael (1993) ‘Variable universe games’ in Ken Binmore, Alan Kirman and P. Tani (eds), Frontiers of Game Theory (pp. 255–275) (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bacharach, Michael (1999) ‘Interactive team reasoning: a contribution to the theory of cooperation’, Research in Economics (53), 117–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Binmore, Ken (1994) Playing Fair (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bratman, Michael E. (1993) ‘Shared intention’, Ethics (104), 97–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cubitt, Robin and Robert Sugden (2003) ‘Common knowledge, salience and convention: a reconstruction of David Lewis’s game theory’, Economics and Philosophy (19), 175–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gauthier, David (1975) ‘Coordination’, Dialogue (14), 195–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, Margaret (1989) On Social Facts (London: Routledge).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, Margaret (1999) ‘Reconsidering the ‘actual contract’ theory of political obligation’ Ethics (109), 236–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodgson, D. H. (1967) Consequences of Utilitarianism (Oxford: Clarendon Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollis, Martin (1998) Trust within Reason (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hurley, Susan L. (1989) Natural Reasons (Oxford: Oxford University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, Maarten (2002) ‘Rationalizing focal points’, Theory and Decision (50), 119–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, David (1969) Convention: A Philosophical Study (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Regan, Donald (1980) Utilitarianism and Cooperation (Oxford: Clarendon Press).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, Jean-Jacques (1762/1988) ‘On social contract’ in Alan Ritter and Julia Conaway Bondanella (eds) Rousseau’s Political Writings (New York: Norton).

    Google Scholar 

  • Schelling, Thomas (1960) The Strategy of Conflict (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Searle, John R. (1990) ‘Collective intentions and actions’, in Philip R. Cohen, Jerry Morgan and Martha E. Pollack (eds) Intentions in Communication (pp. 410–415) (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Sugden, Robert (1986) The Economics of Rights, Co-operation and Welfare (Oxford: Basil Blackwell).

    Google Scholar 

  • Sugden, Robert (1991) ‘Rational choice: a survey of contributions from economics and philosophy’, Economic Journal (101), 751–785.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sugden, Robert (1993) ‘Thinking as a team: toward an explanation of nonselfish behavior’, Social Philosophy and Policy (10), 69–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sugden, Robert (1995) ‘A theory of focal points’, Economic Journal (105), 1269–1302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sugden, Robert (2000) ‘Team preferences’, Economics and Philosophy (16), 175–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sugden, Robert (2002) ‘Beyond sympathy and empathy: Adam Smith’s concept of fellow-feeling’, Economics and Philosophy (18), 63–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuomela, Raimo (1995) The Importance of Us (Stanford, California: Stanford University Press).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Copyright information

© 2005 Robert Sugden

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Sugden, R. (2005). The Logic of Team Reasoning. In: Gold, N. (eds) Teamwork. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230523203_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics