The Concept of Prisoner's Dilemma

The Prisoner’s Dilemma is an extremely popular game and way of thinking about social interactions and also economics. It judges how people work together and against each other. It helps us understand what governs the balance between cooperation and competition in business, in politics, and in social settings. The two players in the game can choose between two moves, either 'cooperate' or 'defect'. The idea is that each player gains when both cooperate, but if only one of them cooperates, the other one, who defects, will gain more. If both defect, both lose. The whole game situation and its different outcomes can be summarised with the example provided below, hypothetical situations are imagined with the example below

Game theory is one to more complexed topics but reveals a clear understanding from different scholars. Don Ross explained that game theory is the study that interacts with the different choices of economics agents which bring forth many different outcomes with the point to the preferences of those agents, where the outcomes in question might have been intended by none of the agents (Ross, 2016). The properties that game theory considers in economic situations include two or more 'economic actors ' - that is, two or more firms, individuals, political parties, etc. Each individual economic actor has a set of decisions they can make - what price to charge, how much to save, whether to move right or left, etc. Each individual economic actor has a 'goal ' or payoff, such as profit maximization, maximize happiness, minimize loss, etc.

outcomes. Just as in the single Prisoner’s Dilemma, the prisoners are looking for the best results

The behaviour of athletes when it comes to doping can be explained through the use of game theory. In this case it is possible to adapt the prisoner dilemma to explain the behaviour of the athletes. It is no surprise that athletes are becoming more willing to cheat to win, as prizes for events such as the ‘Tour De France’ have a €450,000 prize for the winner, plus the large sponsorship deals that come with the success. This increased incentive to win increases the incentive to cheat, and we can assume that the athletes goal is to maximise his payoff.

An example of the prisoner’s dilemma is graduating from college and is not graduating from college. In real world, college is one of the most competitive markets because once people graduated from college, they fully get benefits of having a college degree. For example, people get high-income, career opportunities, and expand their knowledge base. A company pays more money to college graduates because the college graduates have college degrees that show their abilities to the company. Also, in job markets, almost everywhere now requires at least a bachelor’s degree in order to perform in its position; once people have a bachelor’s degree, they could have a lot of opportunities when they are getting a job. Furthermore, the college graduates

The purpose of this discussion is to give a brief explanation of the Prisoner’s Dilemma

There are many people in this world; no two people are the same. When considering personality theories it is important to note that not all theories apply to all situations or all people. Different theories have different approaches. It is important to know the person before making assumptions about the proper theory to apply to the person or in any given situation. The purpose of this paper is to analysis how different personality theorists could interoperate different individual circumstances and behaviors based on case examples provided by the instructor.

In order to learn more about my personality according to the Big Five, I completed a self- assessment geared towards explaining certain elements of individual personality. The results of this assessment were displayed in the IPIP-Neo Report and described brief descriptions of five different areas of the human personality. The general results

Game Trees, as mentioned earlier, are very useful in determining what outcomes are most likely to occur, in other words, the most rational and logical decision. For example, Poundstone describes a dilemma between a thief trying to sell a priceless item and a questionable man with few scruples. The scenario is a perfect example of the “Prisoner’s Dilemma” and can be analyzed using a Game Tree. The most logical decision for both parties is to cheat, or select Traitor. Yet this decision undermines the “common good” of mutual cooperation which benefits both parties. Logic is what blocks the best outcome, simply due to the fact that rationality dictates a prime strategy of cheating and defection. The trend in such situations, similar to a business

Many people live without knowing exactly who they are paying very little attention on their personality. Like many things it may be hard to define the character of the person and to explain why he or she behaves in a particular way in one or another situation. Some say that genetics plays the leading role in defining the character of the person, others are sure it is the result of environment that has a substantial influence on people 's behavior. The following paper will describe the relevance of psychological tests in evaluating people 's personality and will give the example of such quiz.

Personality testing is used on a daily basis in all areas of psychology. These tests evaluate and measure traits, values, attitudes, personal identity, and many more aspects of an individual’s personality (Cohen, Swerdlik, & Sturman, 2013). Such assessments as the Thematic Apperception Test, Neuroticism, Extroversion, and Openness inventory and the Psychopathic Personality Inventory are instruments, which assist the psychologist in assessing an individual’s personality. The following paper will discuss each of these tests.

To discover the traits of the participants, the participants were given personality tests to discover their scores for the “Big Five” personality traits, otherwise known as openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and emotional stability. They were then asked the

The economic theory proposing that humans are rational being and rational being respond to incentives thus uses utility functions and payoffs to formulate the exact amount of punishment or to study the effects of punishments. Game theory forms as a good means of problem solving because it averages out the overall effects of the randomness in the behavior of criminals, given that most of them are outliers. Also in such cases it is a good tool because very high payoffs usually elicit rational behavior and when the matters are of life and death, people mostly act

While the game has many variations, the core concept is most simply represented as a symmetric 2x2 game with ordinal payoffs. Below is an illustration of perhaps the most well known example; two suspects (Dave and Henry) are each facing the choice of whether to plead guilty or innocent. However, neither individual can be certain of what the other will decide. While the optimum outcome for the players would be to both plead innocent and receive two years each, either one of them could improve their payoff by pleading guilty. In fact, the only outcome where neither has an incentive to change their plea is the least optimal overall, where both have ‘defected’. This point is commonly referred to as the Nash equilibrium. In general, while the payoffs themselves may vary, the prisoner’s dilemma is characterised by a single dominant strategy for both players to defect, leading to an inefficient outcome.

The first task was to determine who to include in the game, and then it was necessary to induce them into playing it seriously enough that it would produce relatively accurate results. The classic prisoner dilemma seemed like the most interesting type of game to play because it could result in the greatest diversity of results. At work, broken merchandise is not considered a problem because it is covered in the annual budget, and it is considered a part of doing business just like a certain amount of theft