View Poll Results: What is your proposal?

Voters
57. You may not vote on this poll
  • $100 to me, $0 to player B

    4 7.02%
  • $99 to me, $1 to player B

    3 5.26%
  • $90 to me, $10 to player B

    1 1.75%
  • $80 to me, $20 to player B

    1 1.75%
  • $70 to me, $30 to player B

    2 3.51%
  • $60 to me, $40 to player B

    7 12.28%
  • $50 to me, $50 to player B

    36 63.16%
  • $40 to me, $60 to player B

    3 5.26%
  • $30 to me, $70 to player B

    0 0%
  • $20 or less to me, $80 or more to player B

    0 0%
Page 6 of 14 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 134

Thread: Hypothetical: $100 Game

  1. #51
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Last Seen
    01-19-12 @ 03:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    358

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    Interesting point. Actually, you are probably correct. I am realizing that even MY premise was based on human psychology. If player A chooses $100, my position was that player B would reject that because he wouldn't be getting ANYTHING. However, by getting 0$, he wouldn't be losing anything. His position would remain as it was.

    So, from a mathematical position alone, I agree with you.
    Even from a psychology standpoint I believe: though I give them no incentive to say yes either. 99/1 gives better odds at beating their psychology. But I have to assume they know I'm going to do what's in my best interest (at no cost to them) as I would assume in the vice versa if we won the first toss, and I would concede to the 100/0 deal if I were player B. And even if they disagree and shoot down my proposal, I still lose nothing.
    Last edited by fredmertz; 06-14-10 at 02:46 PM.

  2. #52
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    29,048

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    Quote Originally Posted by fredmertz View Post
    Even from a psychology standpoint I believe: though I give them no incentive to say yes either. 99/1 gives better odds at beating their psychology. But I have to assume they know I'm going to do what's in my best interest (at no cost to them) as I would assume in the vice versa if we won the first toss, and I would concede to the 100/0 deal if I were player B. And even if they disagree and shoot down my proposal, I still lose nothing.
    But many people are not going to agree with your deal, so although you would get the most possible when someone does agree to your 100/0, you would need to consider the odds of someone actually agreeing to the proposal.

    For me, there is no way that I would agree to 100/0 split unless I really believed that you might need the money more than me. Without actually knowing the person personally, anything but a 50/50 split would be rewarding greed and unfairness, and I would disagree to it on principle. I think the more uneven the money ratio is, the more likely you are to not get anything. So if you consider statistics in this, you would be most likely to make the most money (especially if you played this game often enough from either side) by always offering, and only accepting a 50/50 split (if you had little idea of when the game would actually end).
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  3. #53
    Clown Prince of Politics
    Psychoclown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Hiding from the voices in my head.
    Last Seen
    12-14-17 @ 09:31 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    1,738

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    Looking at this, if I were player A I'd assume a 50/50 split would be accepted 100%. So that makes a fifty dollar gain my baseline. Anything I propose greater in my favor, I jeopardize the guaranteed 50 bucks. So the question would be how much do increase the risk of losing everything vs the potential gains. Let's say if I just tweaked the split to 51/49. I'd say you'd still get at least 90% chance of it being accepted. But is the 10% chance of losing a guaranteed 50 bucks worth the potential gain of a dollar? Math says now 50 x 100 = 500 vs 51 x 90 = 459. And I expect that trend would continue. For each increase in potential gain, you'd disproportionally increase the risk for a total loss. So a 50/50 split is likely to best choice for maximizing my gains.

    Now, I believe the formula changes as we increase the total sum in question. Its easy for us as player B to reject 50 bucks or less based on a sense of fairness or personal pride. It's a small amount of money that has no impact on our overall financial status. Change the overall amount from $100 to $10,000 and now it becomes a different game. 60/40 split against Player B still gives him 4 grand. Its a lot harder to turn your back on 4K just because the other guy is getting more. And I believe the more you increase the amount, the greater disparities in the split Player B would be likely to accept. If the overall sum was a 100 million, and I as player B was offered only one million, I'd still take it. As I believe most people would.
    Slipping into madness is good for the sake of comparison - Unknown.

  4. #54
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    You are assigning value to the numbers. I am not. Arithmetically, 99>1, and anything>0. The numbers are neither have value OR are valueless.
    But you are implying that a larger number of something is better, which is incorporating psychology again.

    There can be value in something without human psychology being a factor. It can be caused by human biology, for example.

    99 items of food > than 1 item of food > 0 items of food. Psychology does not have any bearing on that. Psychology would only come into play if the food was liked or not, thus altering the biological value by incorporating the psychological devaluation.

    99 bullets in the chest < 1 bullet in the chest < 0 bullets in the chest. Again, Psychology isn't a factor. Psychology would only be a factor if one was suicidal and wanted to reject biological imperatives.

    These examples do not incorporate human psychology, but it also shows that value can be assessed without psychology being involved.
    Last edited by Tucker Case; 06-14-10 at 03:03 PM.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  5. #55
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    One other wrinkle that might be worth considering - the setting in which the decision takes place.

    I participated in studies like this all the time in undergrad in order to make some money, and the first time I ever had this scenario, my counterpart (who I never met) and I were seated at computers in different rooms. I suspect it was easier to play hardball (and to screw over the other party) when you weren't face to face.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  6. #56
    Irrelevant Pissant

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Last Seen
    03-13-14 @ 07:55 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    4,194

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    I think the point he's making Panache that, in regards to the game and the information provided, you are essentially in a vacuum
    Right. Which is rather my point. The false assumption here is not that people will act rationally, but rather that people exist in a vacuum. If we assume that, then there is no reason for player B to accept anything. Even if you give him the full $100, what is he going to do with it in a vacuum? You can't breath it. ;-)

  7. #57
    Educator
    Anarcho-fascist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    T E X A S !
    Last Seen
    09-26-14 @ 11:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,069
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    99/1 if both A and B's goal is to make as much money for themselves in that one game. I'd split it 50/50 in real life.

  8. #58
    Goddess of Bacon

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Charlottesville, VA
    Last Seen
    05-28-12 @ 09:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,988

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    One other wrinkle that might be worth considering - the setting in which the decision takes place.

    I participated in studies like this all the time in undergrad in order to make some money, and the first time I ever had this scenario, my counterpart (who I never met) and I were seated at computers in different rooms. I suspect it was easier to play hardball (and to screw over the other party) when you weren't face to face.
    so, was it like a repeated thing? I mean, did you do it over and over with the same person?

    Because if the person I was doing it with kept trying to dick me over, I'd start doing the same and get rid of my "50/50" ideal. LOL

  9. #59
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    I already figured out this was a "trap" thread on the concept of fairness. It was pretty well played as I didn't figure it out until today, and I'm usually pretty quick at figuring out "trap" threads. It's a good exercise in examining the difference between theory and real world application.
    This scenario is actually fairly common in Game Theory. When I was in b-school just a couple years ago, my economics textbook and professor said flat-out that the "correct" answer was $99/$1. Today, I don't think you'd find many economists who would be so rash. The degree to which human psychology comes into play varies depending on the economists you're talking to, with the traditional economists favoring something approximating $99/$1, and the behavioral economists favoring something closer to $50/$50.

    But in any case, it isn't a trap. This scenario doesn't render any below-the-belt punches or strawmen attacks on any particular economic philosophy. I think that it does highlight why the idea of a perfectly efficient market isn't realistic...and naturally, exposes flaws in the economic ideologies that derive from that. Yes, the idea that markets aren't efficient turns a few of the more extreme libertarian philosophies (like anarcho-capitalism) on their heads...but it also means that the three mainstream philosophies of the late 20th century (monetarism, Keynesianism, and supply-side economics) need to be rethought as well, since they are all based in part on the incorrect premise that markets are efficient.
    Last edited by Kandahar; 06-14-10 at 05:07 PM.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  10. #60
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    Quote Originally Posted by rivrrat View Post
    so, was it like a repeated thing? I mean, did you do it over and over with the same person?

    Because if the person I was doing it with kept trying to dick me over, I'd start doing the same and get rid of my "50/50" ideal. LOL
    IIRC, and this was a while back, it was only $10 instead of $100, we alternated back and forth between who played A and B, and they told us that the exercise would happen some number of times between 2 and 7(?). The effect was that you had a reason to play nice at the beginning, but you also could try to leverage things toward the end (though you didn't know when the end would be).

Page 6 of 14 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •