Hypergames: Developing a model of conflict

Bennett, Peter

doi:10.1016/0016-3287(80)90005-1

Cited by 143 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Wang et al (1987) compare in detail these improvements to the previous hypergame methodologies of Bennett (1977Bennett ( , 1980 and Takahashi et al (1984). In modeling hypergames, ideas such as the order of expectation, types of misperceptions, levels of hypergames, and mapping are rigorously defined.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…A hypergame refers to a mathematical structure that models the ways in which participants perceive a conflict, whereas hypergame analysis stands for the application of a stability analysis algorithm or solution concept to a hypergame model in order to predict the possible resolutions to the hypergame. Utilizing Bennett's definitions, hypergames have been shown to be useful for modeling sports (Bennett et al, 1980), military (Bennett & Dando, 1979;Said & Hartley, 1982), and business (Giesen & Bennett, 1979;Bennett et al, 1981) disputes. Takahashi et al (1984) developed an operational procedure for conveniently analyzing a hypergame.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

“…His research offers decision makers a tool to determine whether misperception of preferences is profitable and, if so, how the deception should take place, Although the research presented in this paper has some features which may be partially related to the aforementioned work, the research constitutes a direct extension and improvement of a topic called hypergame analysis. The term hypergame was first coined by Bennett in 1977, who also furnished definitions for various kinds of hypergames (Bennett, 1980). A hypergame refers to a mathematical structure that models the ways in which participants perceive a conflict, whereas hypergame analysis stands for the application of a stability analysis algorithm or solution concept to a hypergame model in order to predict the possible resolutions to the hypergame.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Modeling misperceptions in games

1988

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, a new method, called improved hypergame analysis, is developed for studying a conflict in which one or more players have misunderstood the true nature of the dispute. The method can be used for analyzing disputes having any finite number of participants consisting of individuals, organizations, nations or any kind of societal group. In order to extend the usefulness of hypergame analysis, the new and comprehensive approach is presented by giving the theoretical definitions, mathematical models, and practical procedures for performing a hypergame stability analysis. Because of the improvements to hypergame analysis, a conflict having misperceptions can be rigorously and accurately modeled and the perceived resolutions to the dispute can be properly ascertained.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

mentioning

confidence: 98%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Modeling misperceptions in games

1988

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We will generally assume in this article that the same frame is perceived by all characters--i.e., it corresponds to a standard game rather than a "hypergame" as defined by Bennett (1980). This assumption is made so that we may begin by considering the simplest case; it seems not to be necessary, and we look forward to seeing it dropped.…”

Section: Definition Of Frame and Interactionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Drama theory and its relation to game theory. Part 1: Dramatic resolution vs. Rational solution

Howard

1994

Group Decis Negot

102

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drama theory differs from game theory in that it does not regard actors' preferences and perceived opportunities as fixed, but as capable of being changed by the actors themselves under the pressure of pre-play negotiations. Thus characters in a drama undergo change and development. A manyperson, multiphase theory of dramatic transformation is presented, showing how the core of a drama (in the sense of game theory) is transformed by the interaction between the characters into a strict, strong equilibrium to which they all aspire. The process of dramatic transformation is shown to be driven by actors' reactions to various "paradoxes of rationality"; it is proved that when all these paradoxes have been overcome, a full dramatic resolution has been reached, satisfying actors' emotional and moral demands, as well as the demands of rationality.

show abstract

“…The current research on conflict analysis, on the one hand, is focused on finding an alliance to improve stability of the situation and realizing equilibrium. On the other hand, some new methods are proposed based on the classical game theory, such as hyper-game [2] , the soft game [3] and graph model [4] . The diversification and integrative conflict analysis approachs are also fruitful, such as rough set theory [5][6] , analytic hierarchy process (AHP) [7] , matrix analysis [8][9][10] , multi-objective game analysis [11] , Bayesian belief networks [12] , gray system theory [13] and fuzzy analysis method [14][15][16] .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fuzzy Multi-Objective Lattice Order Decision Approach for Preference Ranking in Conflict Analysis

Guo¹,

Wang²

2016

IJCIS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Based on conflict analysis and lattice order theory, this paper integrates fuzziness and non-transitivity of the preference, exclusiveness and incommensurability of the objective into conflict analysis, proposes a new fuzzy multi-objective lattice order decision method for preference ranking in conflict analysis. Furthermore, a conflict case study of Chinese enterprise overseas acquisition problem, including two players and complicated preference, is used to illustrate how the proposed method can be applied in practice along with its the feasibility and effectiveness. Conclusions showed that, compared to the traditional preference ranking in conflict analysis, the present method tends to be simpler, easier to reach an alliance and improve the stability of conflict situations. It also can avoid emotional and subjective decision-making, thus making results more rational and objective.

show abstract

Hypergames: Developing a model of conflict

Cited by 143 publications

References 9 publications

Modeling misperceptions in games

Modeling misperceptions in games

Drama theory and its relation to game theory. Part 1: Dramatic resolution vs. Rational solution

Fuzzy Multi-Objective Lattice Order Decision Approach for Preference Ranking in Conflict Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About