Game theoryClassroom · multi-user
Prisoner's Dilemma Live — Face Your Classmate
The canonical dilemma played against a real classmate, not a bot. You're sealed into a pair for a run of rounds and each round you both choose at once: cooperate, or take the tempting one-sided win. Pick the story it's told in — two suspects in separate rooms, two shops in a price war, two partners splitting a bonus, two friends sharing notes — and see whether the framing changes how your class plays.
You’ll learn: Feel why defecting is individually rational in a one-shot dilemma, discover what repetition and reputation change, and see that the same payoffs told as a loss or as a gain do not produce the same behaviour.
- Dominant strategy
- Nash equilibrium
- Cooperation in repeated games
- Tit-for-Tat
- Framing effects
Teacher guide
Students will learn to
- Experience the dilemma against a real person: the temptation to defect is the same, but the person you face afterwards is not a bot.
- Work out why defection is the dominant strategy in a single round, and what changes once the same pair meets again.
- Compare how the class plays when the identical payoffs are framed as losses to avoid rather than gains to win.
Before the session — ask
- If betraying your partner always pays you more this round, why would anyone ever cooperate?
- Would you play differently against someone you'll face again next round than against a stranger you'll never meet?
After the session — discuss
- Did cooperation build up, hold, or collapse across the rounds — and what tipped it?
- Who ended up with the best total: the pairs who cooperated, or the players who defected?
- Run the class again in the other framing (losses vs. gains) and compare the cooperation rates. Why should identical payoffs produce different play?
Timing
- Briefing, framing & pairing4–6 min
- The rounds (host sets 1–10)6–12 min
- Reveal, benchmarks & debrief10–12 min
Run it with your class
Students join with a code or QR — no account needed. Teachers start a session from the dashboard.