Abstract and Keywords
This article describes how game theory has contributed to the understanding of the American presidency as well as how future research could use this technique to advance the understanding even further. The three topics covered here include presidential vetoes, public opinion, and Supreme Court nominations. It also determines several additional areas that seem especially suitable for new game theoretic analysis. Additionally, special attention is given to the limitations of game theory. The data shows how blame game theory can help identify personal versus institutional determinants of veto usage. Game theoretic models of vetoes have not only aided econometric analysis, but also qualitative empirical work. A more detailed description of how game theory has altered the substantive understanding of public opinion is offered. Simple differences in the assumptions of the models can produce vastly different predictions; thus it would be a shame if the theories were only produced by ‘outsiders’ to the field.
Access to the complete content on Oxford Handbooks Online requires a subscription or purchase. Public users are able to search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter without a subscription.
If you have purchased a print title that contains an access token, please see the token for information about how to register your code.