CHOU, Eileen, MCCONNELL, Margaret, NAGEL, Rosemarie and PLOTT, Charles R., 2009. The control of game form recognition in experiments: understanding dominant strategy failures in a simple two person “guessing” game. Experimental Economics. June 2009. Vol. 12, no. 2, p. 159–179. DOI 10.1007/s10683-008-9206-4. [Accessed 17 December 2023].
**Abstract**: The paper focuses on instructions and procedures as the reasons that subjects fail to behave according to the predictions of game theory as observed in two person guessing game experiments. In this game, each of two people has to choose simultaneously a number between 0 and 100. The winner is the person whose chosen number is the closest to 2/3 of the average of the two numbers. The weakly dominant strategy is zero. Because of the simplicity of the game (once it is understood), the widespread failure of subjects to choose the weakly dominant strategy has been interpreted as evidence of some fundamental inability to behave strategically. The experiments reported here demonstrate that the failure to act strategically is related to how the game is presented. Several different presentations are studied. Some subjects fail to recognize the game form when it is presented abstractly. When the game is transformed into the simple isomorphic game and presented in a familiar context, subjects do choose weakly dominant strategies. Suggestions for better experiment control are given.
DEVRIES, Rheta, 1970. The development of role-taking as reflected by behavior of bright, average, and retarded children in a social guessing game. Child Development. Online. 1970. P. 759–770. Available from: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1127222 [Accessed 17 December 2023].
**Abstract**: 3 studies explored the performance of young bright, average, and retarded children in a binary-choice, social guessing game. Results suggested a 5-stage sequence of development from a total lack of recognition of the need for secrecy and deceptiveness in the first stage to the fifth stage in which the child was competitive and attempted to outwit the opponent by utilizing an irregular, shifting strategy. Stage changes were viewed in terms of increased role-taking ability. The development of competitive and deceptive hiding prior to competitive and deceptive guessing suggested that the child is able to take account of the other's perspective before he is able to take account of the-other's-taking-account-of the child's perspective. Psychometric ability seems to be a more crucial factor than age in the development of role taking at the lower end of the psychometric range, and chronological age seems to be a more crucial factor than psychometric ability at the average or above range.
The term double contingency (or social contingency), originally from the theory of the famous American sociologist Talcott Parsons, describes the fact that both ego and alter [→Meaning Dimensions] reciprocally observe their selections as contingent.
GENOVA, Judith, 1994. Turing’s sexual guessing game. Social Epistemology. Online. October 1994. Vol. 8, no. 4, p. 313–326. DOI 10.1080/02691729408578758. [Accessed 17 December 2023].
Like most discussions of Turing's test for artificial intelligence, the recent stagings of the Imitation Game in Boston focused solely on the question: did the computer think; that is, was it able to deceive its human interrogators into believing that it too was human? While important, such exclusive attention to the endgame obscures many other questions about the nature of thinking being raised by Turing both consciously and unconsciously in his complex and multilayered text, 'Computing machinery and intelligence'.
What is thinking and how should it be measured are two such questions. Less obvious are the questions he raises about the nature of gender and sex, the natural and the artificial, the analogue and discrete, and the biological and cultural. Inquiring with feminist eyes and ears helps to locate these other issues typically treated as irrelevant by traditional readers of this text. My hope is that by touring the text more slowly, and lingering in deconstructionist fashion on the details, one will stop reading Turing's text solely as a manifesto for artificial intelligence, and begin to see its plea for artificial beings with new gender and sexual opportunities. Like Darwin, Turing eagerly awaits, for reasons both personal and philosophical, the evolution of new forms.
FUCHS, Peter, 2016. Der Fuss des Leuchtturms liegt im Dunkeln: eine ernsthafte Studie zu Sinn und Sinnlosigkeit. Weilerswist: Velbrück Wissenschaft. ISBN 978-3-95832-064-2. pdf 
GOODMAN, Kenneth S., 2014a. Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game. In: Making sense of learners making sense of written language. Routledge. p. 103–112. taylorfrancis [Accessed 17 December 2023].
GOODMAN, Kenneth S., 2014. Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game. In: Making sense of learners making sense of written language. Routledge. p. 103–112. taylorfrancis
GOODMAN, Kenneth S., 2014b. A psycholinguistic guessing game. Making Sense of Learners Making Sense of Written Language: The Selected Works of Kenneth S. Goodman and Yetta M. Goodman. 2014. Vol. 103. books.google.ch [Accessed 17 December 2023].
GOODMAN, Kenneth S. and GOODMAN, Yetta M., 2014. Making sense of learners making sense of written language: the selected works of Kenneth S. Goodman and Yetta M. Goodman. New York, NY: Routledge. World library of educationalists series. ISBN 978-0-415-82033-2.
~
NICHOLSON, Tom, 1986. READING IS NOT A GUESSING GAME‐THE GREAT DEBATE REVISITED. Reading Psychology. January 1986. Vol. 7, no. 3, p. 197–210. DOI 10.1080/0270271860070307. [Accessed 17 December 2023].
In this review, the debate on the importance of Decoding in Reading is revisited. In particular, the focus is on the positions taken by two different reading theorists, Phil Gough and Ken Goodman. It is argued that the debate now seems to be settled, and that Gough's view, with its implications for reading acquisition and comprehension, has more explanatory power in terms of helping us to understand the success of the good reader, and the plight of the bad.
[…]
Ken Goodman's paper, "Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game", made him the person most clearly associated with the view that reading is a top down process. But Goodman became the target of debate in Phil Gough's paper, "One second of reading", which took the opposite view, that reading is a bottom up, serial process.
[…]
The bottom up, serial model made the claim that the Reader is not a guesser. Yet Goodman's early research showed that this claim was false. Goodman (1965) found a 60-80 per cent improvement in reading accuracy when children read words in story context rather than isolation, as in a word list. He argued that story context provided extra linguistic cues which children exploited so as to assist in word identification. To Goodman these data indicated that reading was indeed a sophisticated guessing game•
[…]
In this review, the great debate on the importance of decoding in reading was revisited. In particular, the focus was on the positions taken by Phil Gough and Ken Goodman. The decision was in favour of Gough, who argues that reading is not a guessing game. Goodman's view seemed more appropriate in cases where decoding was difficult. In such cases, given a rich sentence context, it is possible for the reader to guess the meanings of some words.
The link between decoding and comprehension was also revisited. This link has never been made clear in the debate. But again, it seems that Gough's emphasis on decoding was the right one. The fast decoder reads more, and reads accurately. This in turn expands the child's lexicon, and improves overall comprehension.
So the great debate seems to be settled. Reading is not a guessing game. Yet without the debaters we may not have faced this issue so squarely. It has indeed been an exciting show to watch.
~
ORLOV, Vladimir A. and VINNIKOV, Alexander, 2005. The great guessing game: Russia and the Iranian nuclear issue. The Washington Quarterly. Online. March 2005. Vol. 28, no. 2, p. 49–66. DOI 10.1162/0163660053295185. [Accessed 17 December 2023].
SEIDEN, Steven S., 2000. A guessing game and randomized online algorithms. In: Proceedings of the thirty-second annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing. Online. Portland Oregon USA: ACM. May 2000. p. 592–601. ISBN 978-1-58113-184-0. DOI 10.1145/335305.335385. [Accessed 17 December 2023].
STAHL, Dale O., 1996. Boundedly rational rule learning in a guessing game. Games and Economic Behavior. Online. 1996. Vol. 16, no. 2, p. 303–330. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899825696900883 [Accessed 17 December 2023].
WEBER, Roberto A., 2003. ‘Learning’with no feedback in a competitive guessing game. Games and Economic Behavior. 2003. Vol. 44, no. 1, p. 134–144. sciencedirect [Accessed 17 December 2023].
**Abstract**: An assumption underlying current models of learning in games is that learning takes place only through repeated experience of outcomes. This paper experimentally tests this assumption using Nagel's (1995, Amer. Econ. Rev. 85, 1313–1326) competitive guessing game. The experiment consists of several periods of repeated play under alternative feedback conditions, including no-feedback conditions in which players receive no information between periods. If learning takes place only through reinforcement resulting from experienced outcomes, Choices in the no-feedback conditions should not converge towards the Nash equilibrium. While less than under full information, there is convergence towards the equilibrium prediction in the no-feedback conditions. Varying priming given to subjects between periods does not affect the results.
DOT FROM two-level-diagram