Minds and Machines 12 (3):327-352 (2002)
|Abstract||Individual rationality, or doing what is best for oneself, is a standard model used to explain and predict human behavior, and von Neumann–Morgenstern game theory is the classical mathematical formalization of this theory in multiple-agent settings. Individual rationality, however, is an inadequate model for the synthesis of artificial social systems where cooperation is essential, since it does not permit the accommodation of group interests other than as aggregations of individual interests. Satisficing game theory is based upon a well-defined notion of being good enough, and does accommodate group as well as individual interests through the use of conditional preference relationships, whereby a decision maker is able to adjust its preferences as a function of the preferences, and not just the options, of others. This new theory is offered as an alternative paradigm to construct artificial societies that are capable of complex behavior that goes beyond exclusive self interest.|
|Keywords||decision theory game theory group rationality individual rationality satisficing|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Joseph Henrich, Robert Boyd, Samuel Bowles, Colin Camerer, Ernst Fehr, Herbert Gintis, Richard McElreath, Michael Alvard, Abigail Barr, Jean Ensminger, Natalie Smith Henrich, Kim Hill, Francisco Gil-White, Michael Gurven, Frank W. Marlowe & John Q. Patton (2005). “Economic Man” in Cross-Cultural Perspective: Behavioral Experiments in 15 Small-Scale Societies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (6):795-815.
Andrew M. Colman (2003). Beyond Rationality: Rigor Without Mortis in Game Theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (2):180-192.
Johan van Benthem & Fenrong Liu (2007). Dynamic Logic of Preference Upgrade. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 17 (2):157-182.
Boudewijn De Bruin (2005). Game Theory in Philosophy. Topoi 24 (2):197-208.
Thomas Getty (2007). In Evolutionary Games, Enlightened Self-Interests Are Still Ultimately Self-Interests. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 30 (1):25-26.
Boudewijn de Bruin (2005). Game Theory in Philosophy. Topoi 24 (2):197-208.
Richard Schuster (2003). Why Not Go All the Way. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (2):173-174.
Lisa J. Carlson & Raymond Dacey (2010). Social Norms and the Traditional Deterrence Game. Synthese 176 (1):105 - 123.
Andrew M. Colman & Michael Bacharach (1997). Payoff Dominance and the Stackelberg Heuristic. Theory and Decision 43 (1):1-19.
Maarten C. W. Janssen (2001). Rationalizing Focal Points. Theory and Decision 50 (2):119-148.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads2 ( #245,904 of 722,776 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?