Good to see you, strangequark!
Looking at social sciences applications of game theory sounds very interesting and a good idea.
If you want to make things more surprising and realistic, you will want to look at games with more than two players. If you look at these a bit, you will realise that they are very different indeed, often with many Nash equilibria. This leads to surprising consequences. Co-operation is in most cases crucial.
One useful trick is that you can turn any non-zero sum game into a zero sum game by adding an artificial extra player. For example you might add the grim reaper to a game where staying alive was the aim.
Hi all,
I'm supposed to write a paper about some issue in the social sciences. I wanted to do something with game theory. I was thinking that maybe I should write about how human behaviour should be viewed (more specifically, should human interactions be viewed from a tit-for-tat perspective, or some other perspective?). I was wondering if anyone here knew of any good scholarly articles for or against a tit-for-tat view. There are probably many articles pro tit-for-tat so it would be of even greater help for me to find a scholarly article against it or using a different alternative.
[Edit: In restrospect, I should probably narrow my topic by asking whether or not a specific social phenomena should be viewed as a zero sum game or a non zero sum game. Is there any such phenomena that is in current dispute about what type of game it is?]
Strangequark