, Volume 115, Issue 3, pp 355–373 | Cite as

To Give a Surprise Exam, Use Game Theory



This paper proposes a game-theoretic solution of the surprise examination problem. It is argued that the game of “matching pennies” provides a useful model for the interaction of a teacher who wants her exam to be surprising and students who want to avoid being surprised. A distinction is drawn between prudential and evidential versions of the problem. In both, the teacher should not assign a probability of zero to giving the exam on the last day. This representation of the problem provides a diagnosis of where the backwards induction argument, which “proves” that no surprise exam is possible, is mistaken.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Cargile, J.: 1967, 'The Surprise Test Paradox', Journal of Philosophy 64, 550–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Eells, E.: 1991, Probabilistic Causality, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  3. Gettier, E.: 1963, 'Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?', Analysis 23, 121–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Kyburg, H.: 1961, Probability and the Logic of Rational Belief, Wesleyan University Press, Middletown, Connecticut.Google Scholar
  5. Mougin, G. and Sober, E.: 1994, 'Betting Against Pascal's Wager', Nous 28, 382–95.Google Scholar
  6. Olin, D.: 1983, 'The Prediction Paradox Resolved', Philosophical Studies 44, 225–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Quine, W.: 1953, 'On a So-Called Paradox', Mind 62, 65–67. Reprinted in The Ways of Paradox and Other Essays, Random House, New York (1966), pp. 19–21.Google Scholar
  8. Sainsbury, M.: 1988, Paradoxes, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  9. Skyrms, B.: 1990, The Dynamics of Rational Deliberation, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  10. Sober, E.: 1994, 'The Primacy of Truth-Telling and the Evolution of Lying', in From a Biological Point of View, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  11. Sorensen, T.: 1988, Blindspots, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1998

Authors and Affiliations


There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations