40.8k views
3 votes
Pts Katie and Taylor are roommates. On a particular day, their lawn needs to be mowed. Each person has to decide whether to take part in moving the lawn. At the end of the day, either the lawn will be mowed of one or both roommates take part in mowing), or it will remain urmowed of neither roommate mows). With happiness measured on a scale of 1 (very unhappy) to 10 (very happy the possible outcomes are as follows: Katie Decision Mew Don't Kat's happiam - 7 Kahepa - 10 Mow Taylor's Decision Taylor's leppes - 7 Katie's happiness Taylor's - 2 Don't me Taylor's happiness - Taylor's happen - If this game is played only once, then which of the following outcomes is the most likely one?

A. Katie mows and Taylor does not mow.
B. Taylor mows and Katie does not mow.
C. Katie and Taylor both mow.
D. All of the above outcomes are equally likely

User Khany
by
7.9k points

1 Answer

1 vote

Final answer:

The most likely outcome for the question involving Katie and Taylor's decision to mow the lawn, which is an example of the Prisoner's Dilemma in game theory, is that all of the above outcomes are equally likely because there's no strategy communicated between the parties for a one-time game. The correct answer is option d.

Step-by-step explanation:

The scenario presented in the question involves Katie and Taylor who face a decision similar to the classic Prisoner's Dilemma, found in game theory, a field of study in economics. The decision to mow or not to mow the lawn and its consequences on their happiness can be mapped onto a payoff matrix, which illustrates potential outcomes based on each roommate's decision. With no cooperation or strategy communicated between Katie and Taylor, it is reasonable to apply the Nash equilibrium concept, where no participant can gain by unilaterally changing their decision given the strategy of the other person.

The most likely outcome is both roommates choosing not to mow the lawn, as depicted in the Prisoner's Dilemma. This outcome is assumed because if one decides to shirk, the other's best response is also to shirk, leading to mutual non-cooperation. This is because the individual cost of mowing alone and ending up tired is generally perceived as worse than the collective inconvenience of an unmowed lawn.

In the given example, this reasoning suggests that the most likely outcome is option D, where all the above outcomes are equally likely because the scenario's one-off nature does not allow for strategy development through repeated play, which typically influences the establishment of mutual cooperation over time.

User Sami Haroon
by
8.2k points