Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

From Game Theory to Drama Theory

  • Living reference work entry
  • Latest version View entry history
  • First Online:
Handbook of Group Decision and Negotiation

  • 42 Accesses

Abstract

Drama Theory is an analytical framework that can be used by parties, either in negotiation or in confrontation with others, to support their strategic decisions. It provides as building blocks a set of concepts that enable any interaction to be concisely modelled. The resulting structure can then be used to explore the implications of current strategic choices as well as to prompt awareness of fresh options. This is done through a mapping of the hopes and demands of those involved and pays due attention to such practically important matters as the credibility of claims, threats and promises and the emotional tone of an engagement. Drama theory evolved from game theory and this process of evolution is the principal subject of the present chapter (the current state of the methodology is described in the chapter “Using Drama Theory to Model Negotiation”). The development process is illustrated by a succession of examples that show how these methods successively and successfully operated as Group Support Systems in conflict situations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Bain H, Howard N, Saaty T (1971) Using the analysis of options technique to analyse a community conflict. J Confl Resolut 15:133–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett PG (1980a) Hypergames: developing a model of conflict. Futures 12:489–507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett PG (1980b) Bidders and dispenser: manipulative hypergames in a multinational context. Eur J Oper Res 4:293–306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett PG (1996) Games and drama: rationality and emotion. Mershon Int Stud Rev 40:171–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett PG, Dando MR (1979) Complex strategic analysis: a hypergame study of the fall of France. J Oper Res Soc 30:23–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett P, Howard N (1996) Rationality, emotion and preference change: drama-theoretic models of choice. Eur J Oper Res 92:603–614

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett PG, Dando MR, Sharp RG (1980) Using hypergames to model difficult social issues: an approach to the case of soccer hooliganism. J Oper Res Soc 31:621–635

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bloom A (ed and trans) (1991) The republic of Plato, 2nd edn. Basic Books, New York, pp 36–39

    Google Scholar 

  • Brams SJ (1994) The theory of moves. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank RH (1988) Passions within reason: the strategic role of the emotions. Norton, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser NM, Hipel KW (1980) Metagame analysis of the Poplar River conflict. J Oper Res Soc 31:377–385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giesen MO, Bennett PG (1979) Aristotle’s fallacy: a hypergame in the oil shipping business …. Omega 7:309–320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harsanyi JC (1974a) Review of paradoxes of rationality: theory of metagames and political behaviour by N. Howard. Am Polit Sci Rev 67:599–600

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harsanyi JC (1974b) Communication. Am Polit Sci Rev 68:730–731

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harsanyi JC (1974c) Communication. Am Polit Sci Rev 68:1694–1695

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (1966a) The theory of metagames. Gen Syst XI:167–186

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (1966b) The mathematics of metagames. Gen Syst XI:187–200

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (1969) Metagame analysis of Vietnam policy. In: Isard W (ed) Vietnam: some basic issues and alternatives. Schenkman Publishing Company, Cambridge, MA, pp 126–142

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (1971) Paradoxes of rationality: theory of metagames and political behaviour. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (1974a) Communication. Am Polit Sci Rev 68:729–730

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (1974b) Communication. Am Polit Sci Rev 68:1692–1693

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (1986) Usefulness of metagame analysis. J Oper Res Soc 37:430–432

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (1989) The manager as politician and general: the metagame approach to analysing cooperation and conflict, and the CONAN play. In: Rosenhead J (ed) Rational analysis for a problematic world. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (1990) ‘Soft’ game theory. Inf Decis Technol 16(3):215–227

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (1993) The role of emotions in multiorganizational decision-making. J Oper Res Soc 44:613–623

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (1994) Drama theory and its relation to game theory. Part 1: Dramatic resolution vs. rational solution & Part 2: Formal model of the resolution process. Group Decis Negot 3:187–206 & 207–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (1998) n-person ‘soft’ games. J Oper Res Soc 49:144–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard N, Murray-Jones P (2002) Transformations at a drama-theoretic ‘moment of truth’. Defence Evaluation & Research Agency, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard N, Bennett PG, Bryant JW, Bradley M (1992/1993) Manifesto for a theory of drama and irrational choice. J Oper Res Soc 44:99–103 and Systems Practice 6, 429–434

    Google Scholar 

  • Hume D (1888) In: Selby-Bigge LA (ed) A treatise on human nature. Clarendon Press, Oxford. Book 2, Part 3, Section 3, p 413

    Google Scholar 

  • Kilgour DM, Hipel KW, Fang L (1987) The graph model for conflicts. Automatica 23:41–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lutz DS (1974) Review of paradoxes of rationality: theory of metagames and political behaviour by N Howard. Technometrics 15:652

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Management Science Center, University of Pennsylvania (1967) A model study of the escalation and de-escalation of conflict. Report ACDA ST-94, United States Arms Control & Disarmament Agency, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Management Science Center, University of Pennsylvania (1968) Toward a quantitative theory of the dynamics of conflict. Report ACDA ST-127, United States Arms Control & Disarmament Agency, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Management Science Center, University of Pennsylvania (1969a) Conflicts and their escalation: metagame analysis. Report ACDA ST-149 part 1, United States Arms Control & Disarmament Agency, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Management Science Center, University of Pennsylvania (1969b) Conflicts and their escalation: the analysis of options: a computer aided method for analysing political problems. Report ACDA ST-149 part 2, United States Arms Control & Disarmament Agency, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Murray-Jones P, Howard N (2001) Co-ordinated positions in a drama-theoretic confrontation: mathematical foundations for a PO decision support system. Defence Evaluation & Research Agency, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Searle JR (1969) Speech acts: an essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Simonton S (2017) Classical Greek oligarchy: a political history. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • The Telegraph (2008) Nigel Howard: scholar who invented ‘drama theory’, advised the military and industry, and wrote a Kung Fu film. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/1905492/Nigel-Howard.html

  • Thrall RM (1974) Review of paradoxes of rationality: theory of metagames and political behaviour by N. Howard. Oper Res 22:669–671

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanderschraaf P, Sillari G (2014) Common knowledge. In: Zalta EN (ed) The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, Spring 2014 edn. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2014/entries/common-knowledge/

  • von Neumann J, Morgenstern O (1944) Theory of games and economic behavior. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Sheffield Business School, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, UK

    Jim Bryant

Authors
  1. Jim Bryant
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jim Bryant .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Wilfrid Laurier University Dept. Mathematics, Waterloo, ON, Canada

    D. Marc Kilgour

  2. University of Strathclyde Strathclyde Business School, Glasgow, UK

    Colin Eden

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Bryant, J. (2021). From Game Theory to Drama Theory. In: Kilgour, D.M., Eden, C. (eds) Handbook of Group Decision and Negotiation. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12051-1_14-4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12051-1_14-4

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-12051-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-12051-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Behavioral Science and PsychologyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Chapter history

  1. Latest

    From Game Theory to Drama Theory
    Published:
    12 March 2021

    DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12051-1_14-4

  2. From Game Theory to Drama Theory
    Published:
    09 February 2021

    DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12051-1_14-3

  3. From Game Theory to Drama Theory
    Published:
    08 December 2020

    DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12051-1_14-2

  4. Original

    From Game Theory to Drama Theory
    Published:
    22 July 2020

    DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12051-1_14-1

Search

Navigation