International Relations 101 (#7): The Prisoner's Dilemma

How can individually rational choices lead to collectively bad outcomes? The prisoner's dilemma is the oldest model in game theory and provides an explanation. In the next few videos, we will apply the logic of the prisoner's dilemma to case studies in international relations.

[cindytheresya]

I really interesting in the concept of Prisoner’s Dilemma, because it well describe how rational strategy occurs and it explains why the option for cooperation is sometimes ignored. Basically, the concept of prisoner’s dilemma shows the condition when the rational choice taken produces a result that is not desired by all parties or players. Rational choice refers to a decision that is considered could give maximum benefit to the party concerned even though it may harm others. Mostly, the decision to cooperate each other will always give more benefit for both parties. However, each party always tries to get maximum profit or benefit by doing their own strategy, which is betraying the other party to secure themselves. In result, they stuck in a bad situation that harms both of them, which is they do not gain what they expect.

[Gametheory]

Game theory is just a way of thinking. Once you have the basics down, you can apply it to any strategic interaction.

[makewire]

The redundancy helps some people retain it better. Most people learn better learning short chunks of information over and over- like when learning a new language. It's not as overwhelming.

[EuroUser]

When the result is (8, 8), both thieves will be wishing that *the other one* had not confessed. But each of them will be contempt with his own decision.

[treydee]

The major issue I have with game theory, and especially the “prisoners dilemma” example, is it assumes or presupposes that each party is aware of all of the available options the other party has. Furthermore it also assumes everyone is incentivized the same or has the same goal. If there is a miscalculation in these foundational assumptions then the whole strategy is compromised.

[ashfaquehossain]

I have a Masters in International Relations and I enjoy this subject very much/ I wish I could have been get this videos in my first year. Very very informative and interesting video's. Thank you for uploading. 

[PunmasterSTP]

Dilemma? More like "delineation"...of greatness! Thanks for another wonderful video in another outstanding series.

[Gametheory]

The "agreement" beforehand is substantially less important than what the people actually want. The prisoners in this example could "agree" to keep quiet before the interrogation, but each individual would want to break it as soon as the policeman makes them the offer.

In contrast, if we both most wanted to get along with each other, than cooperation is easy. From a war perspective, the US wouldn't want to play mean against Canada because we like Canada. Same would not be true with US and Iran.

[janibii_]

This is so interesting cus I’d say that the answer to getting the cooperative outcome would be for the prisoners to be friends, to care about the others interests and trust one another. To me, the prisoner’s dilemma demonstrates that hyper-individuality and caring only about your own interests actually hurts the individual more than building relationships with others. And I mean that alone you could have learnt from the Lego Batman movie, but the thing about the prisoner’s dilemma is it takes this sentiment and puts it into the context of strategy, which can then be put into the context of international relations.

[oalessandroo]

There are two possible interpretations of the prisoner's dilemma:

1) A rational actor should try to maximize net personal gain first,

If you can guarantee that the other party is exactly as rational as you are, then you should stay quiet, because that results in the best possible outcome overall.

If you cannot guarantee that the other party is equally as rational as you are, then you should snitch, because a less rational opponent may ignore the best overall outcome (and threfore snitch), and a more rational opponent will treat *you* as a less rational opponent, (and therefore snitch), at which point the best possible outcome is for you both to snitch.

2) A rational actor should try to maximize net global gains first:

You always cooperate. Best case scenario, you both get a -1 loss. Worst case scenario, you get a -12 loss, your opponent gets no loss. This is still globally better than the global -16 loss that is the case where you both defect.

What I find interesting here is that this comes down to personal values: it is not necessarily true that a rational actor should always maximize *personal* gains. That way lies the tragedy of the commons.

[andreachiarello]

Hello Mr Spaniel.
Thank you for your tireless and very well done work, I'm learning a lot thanks to you.
I bought your book about game theory and i find it excellent. Is a book about IR also coming any soon? I would definitely buy it.
Kind regards

[Larry]

This is nothing short of extraordinary. I recently stumbled upon similar material, and it was breathtaking. "Game Theory and the Pursuit of Algorithmic Fairness" by Jack Frostwell

[moonlightonariver]

I have been following the videos. Thank You so much for investing your time and effort.
I have a question regarding this particular one. What if the prisoners were brothers or something and they had already discussed beforehand that if they were caught they would both remain quiet?
The fact that they dont know each other and looking out only for them themselves.. is that the assumption you have made so that we reach a logical conclusion and not a "silly" one that you said in earlier video?

[bderaman]

Thank you for the video it's really useful.
Regards
Abdulrahman
Kuwait University- political science department

[jvgama]

This is a repetition of what was explained in much detail in previous videos.
Unfortunately, I think is redundant.

However, congratulations for all the other videos in this series. I am learning and enjoying a lot.

[joebobby]

5:37 but like, isn’t that just the greater context of life and being known for snitching?

[gokulbhusal]

How to conceptualize this content in context of foreign nations?

[qwertasdfgzxcvb]

I don't get it. If you know what the other player is going to do, then it's better to confess. But, you don't, so why not consider just staiyng quiet?

[jokhard]

I understand the concept here but it doesn't really translate 1:1 to real life. If I ratted out my co-criminal and sent them to jail for a full year, I would have to worry about them plotting and scheming for a way to get back at me once they were set free. That sounds like much more trouble than 1 month in jail does, in best case scenario. And in worst case scenario, they'll have to watch out for my plotting, next. ò_ó

In short, prisoner's dilemma works only as a mathematical problem. Once you apply it to real life, it becomes much more complex.

[reghin]

Getting politically correct toward the end there. "She", indeed... you're trying too hard. Feminists will always find a way to feel discriminated against, it's what makes them what they are. For instance, they might instead complain about the fact that the video is being narrated by a male voice (and not a woman's).
Oh, and nice work on this IR series. It's a great outline of a course that you would be able to teach, if you haven't already.