As a doctoral student of Reinhard Selten at Bonn, she combined rational game theory, which is firmly anchored in mathematics, with behavourial game theory, which is routed in psychology.
They challenged the hegemony of the conscious mind that plays its mono-rational games, sets rules and passes judgement.
In economics, traditional ("rational choice") game theory can be used to explain macro behavioral outcomes by appealing to the equilibrium of some underlying game [1], [2].
You need "rational actor" game theory.
The tools of analysis are realism, rational choice, game theory, decision theory: clinical and bloodless modes of thinking.
It then deduces the best course of action for any rational player.Existing game-theory analyses of doping look at things either from just the competitors' points of view, or from the points of view of both competitors and organisers.
This logic of backwards induction leads to immediate defection as the only rational (sub-game perfect Nash equilibrium) strategy.
Epistemic game theory views rational decision making in games as something not essentially different from rational decision making under uncertainty.
But as Posner and Vermeule develop their argument, Schmitt fades away, and is replaced by an incongruous reliance on the rational actors of game theory.
Based on rational assumptions, the game theory is to study the decision-making mechanism and the balance of decision-making interactions [9].
As the rational choice, classical game theory recommends a mixed strategy in such situations, which is remarkably bad advice for real life, and luckily descriptively inadequate.
