IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-02865611.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

On the Rationality of Team Reasoning and Some of its Normative Implications

Author

Listed:
  • Cyril Hédoin

    (REGARDS - Recherches en Économie Gestion AgroRessources Durabilité Santé- EA 6292 - URCA - Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne - MSH-URCA - Maison des Sciences Humaines de Champagne-Ardenne - URCA - Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne)

Abstract

Theories of team reasoning in game theory build on the assumption that best-reply reasoning is not the only reasoning mode agents may endorse. Instead, they may make choice on the basis of team preferences and/or as participants in a mutually beneficial practice. This paper reflects on the way to account for the rationality of endorsing team reasoning in a strategic decision problem. I focus on the particular issue of the rationality of making choice on the basis of team reasoning rather than other reasoning modes. I argue that the endorsement of team reasoning in specific contexts can be interpreted as a commitment that can be rationally assessed from an agent-subjective perspective. This necessitates making a distinction between preferences, conceived as individual interests, and values, defined as broader motivations and reasons to act. I suggest that this account of the rationality of team reasoning has significant normative implications, in particular regarding the relevance of standard welfare economics.

Suggested Citation

  • Cyril Hédoin, 2018. "On the Rationality of Team Reasoning and Some of its Normative Implications," Post-Print hal-02865611, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-02865611
    DOI: 10.3917/redp.283.0373
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Guilhem Lecouteux, 2018. "What does “we” want? Team Reasoning, Game Theory, and Unselfish Behaviours," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 128(3), pages 311-332.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-02865611. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.