Strategic thinking

• Verfasst von: Grüning, David [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Krueger, Joachim I. [VerfasserIn]
• Titel: Strategic thinking
• Titelzusatz: a random walk into the rabbit hole
• Verf.angabe: David J. Grüning, Joachim Krueger
• E-Jahr: 2021
• Jahr: June 28, 2021
• Umfang: 13 S.
• Teil: volume:7
• Teil: year:2021
• Teil: number:1
• Teil: elocationid:24921
• Teil: pages:1-13
• Teil: extent:13
• Fussnoten: Gesehen am 10.08.2021
• Titel Quelle: Enthalten in: Collabra: Psychology
• Ort Quelle: Oakland, CA : University of California Press, 2017
• Jahr Quelle: 2021
• Band/Heft Quelle: 7(2021), 1, Artikel-ID 24921, Seite 1-13
• ISSN Quelle: 2474-7394
• DOI: doi:10.1525/collabra.24921
• Datenträger: Online-Ressource
• Sprache: eng
• Sach-SW: bias
• Sach-SW: game theory
• Sach-SW: model
• Sach-SW: players
• Sach-SW: prediction
• Sach-SW: self
• Sach-SW: social projection
• Sach-SW: strategy
• K10plus-PPN: 1766018467

Abstract

At its best, strategic thinking yields an advantage needed to beat an opponent. At the least, it protects the person from exploitation. In four studies, conducted in two countries, we used a simple number-guessing game, in which one respondent wins by guessing the number chosen by another. We show that people generate numbers nonrandomly, and, on the basis of this finding, we predict and find that nonrandom strategic choice is advantageous to the guesser if the chooser does not randomize either. As expected, respondents in the role of the guesser preferred to play a game in which they were to actively think of a number instead of randomizing if the chooser had to think of a number, too. Guessers did not prefer thinking if the chooser selected a number randomly. Having shown these limitations to strategic reasoning, we close with the observation that successful strategic reasoning may - at times - require the breaking of rules and being the first to do so.