Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Rationality and Society
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by SCHARPF, F. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Games Real Actors Could Play

The Problem of Mutual Predictability

FRITZ W. SCHARPF

Max Planck Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung, West Germany

The use of game-theoretical explanations and predictions in empirical social science research is often thought to be precluded by the unrealism of the cognitive and computational capabilities that mathematical game theory imputes to its idealized "players" as well as by the prohibitive information costs that an attempt to reconstruct these cognitions and computations would impose on researchers. The article tries to show that these misgivings are exaggerated. Under realistic conditions actors will often be able to pragmatically approximate complete-information conditions regarding each other's strategy options and payoffs. Moreover, empirical research will, in many situations, be able to reconstruct actors' relevant opportunities, perceptions and preferences from socially constructed institutions, norms, and expectations that have always been the subject of mainstream social science research.

Rationality and Society, Vol. 2, No. 4, 471-494 (1990)
DOI: 10.1177/1043463190002004005


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of Theoretical PoliticsHome page
F. W. Scharpf
Games Real Actors Could Play: Positive and Negative Coordination in Embedded Negotiations
Journal of Theoretical Politics, January 1, 1994; 6(1): 27 - 53.
[Abstract]


Home page
Journal of Theoretical PoliticsHome page
M. Hechter and S. Kanazawa
Group Solidarity and Social Order in Japan
Journal of Theoretical Politics, October 1, 1993; 5(4): 455 - 493.
[Abstract]


Home page
Rationality and SocietyHome page
M. HECHTER
The Insufficiency of Game Theory for the Resolution of Real-World Collective Action Problems
Rationality and Society, January 1, 1992; 4(1): 33 - 40.
[Abstract]


Home page
Journal of Theoretical PoliticsHome page
F. W. Scharpf
Games Real Actors Could Play: The Challenge of Complexity
Journal of Theoretical Politics, July 1, 1991; 3(3): 277 - 304.
[Abstract]


Home page
Rationality and SocietyHome page
S. J. Brams
Comments on Scharpf's "Games Real Actors could Play"
Rationality and Society, April 1, 1991; 3(2): 252 - 257.
[Abstract]


Home page
Rationality and SocietyHome page
B. S. Frey
Demand for, and Supply of, Institutions: A Comment on Scharpf
Rationality and Society, April 1, 1991; 3(2): 258 - 260.