Abstract
An attempt is made to relate the findings of probability matching studies to more complex human behavior. The general result is that the PM finding is not directly applicable to situations which are more complex, i.e., where the subject has additional cues available on which to base his prediction.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Gardner, R. A. Multiple-choice decision-behavior. Amer. J. Psychol., 1958, 71, 710–717.
Gullahorn, J. T., & Gullahorn, J. E. A computer model of elementary social behavior. Behav. Sci., 1963, 8, 354–362.
Hokanson, J. E., & Doerr, H. O. Probability learning of interpersonal events. J. Pers., 1964, 32, 514–530.
Mandler, G., Cowan, P. A., & Gold, C. Concept learning and probability matching. J. exp. Psychol., 1964, 67, 514–522.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
1. This study was partially supported by a grant from the National Science Foundation GS999 (“The Psychology of Conflict,” Marc Pilisuk—Principal Investigator). Some of the material in this paper was included in a presentation before the Indiana Psychological Association, November 1966.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Halpin, S.M., Pilisuk, M. Probability matching in the Prisoner’s Dilemma. Psychon Sci 7, 269–270 (1967). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03328554
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03328554