Zero-sum game: Difference between revisions
From ACT Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
imported>Doug Williamson (Add link.) |
imported>Doug Williamson (Add heading.) |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
Therefore any individual participant can only gain by disadvantaging others. | Therefore any individual participant can only gain by disadvantaging others. | ||
In a zero-sum game, win-win strategies are therefore not appropriate or effective for participants in maximising their own utility or wealth. | |||
The term is also used more loosely, to describe any situation in which further intervention or analysis are considered not to be warranted, because no net benefits are likely to be achieved. | 2. ''Analysis paralysis.'' | ||
The term "zero-sum game" is also used more loosely, to describe any situation in which further intervention or analysis are considered not to be warranted, because no net benefits are likely to be achieved. | |||
The expected costs of further intervention or analysis outweighing their expected benefits. | |||
==See also== | ==See also== | ||
*[[Agent based modelling]] | *[[Agent based modelling]] | ||
*[[Analysis paralysis]] | |||
*[[Behavioural economics]] | *[[Behavioural economics]] | ||
*[[Classical economics]] | *[[Classical economics]] | ||
Revision as of 09:15, 20 March 2021
1. Game theory.
Strictly, a zero-sum game is one in which the total wealth or utility of all participants adds up to exactly zero, regardless of the outcome.
Therefore any individual participant can only gain by disadvantaging others.
In a zero-sum game, win-win strategies are therefore not appropriate or effective for participants in maximising their own utility or wealth.
2. Analysis paralysis.
The term "zero-sum game" is also used more loosely, to describe any situation in which further intervention or analysis are considered not to be warranted, because no net benefits are likely to be achieved.
The expected costs of further intervention or analysis outweighing their expected benefits.
