Answer :
Final answer:
The Prisoner's Dilemma shows how two individuals might choose to betray each other rather than cooperate, as confessing is the dominant strategy regardless of the other's actions. This can lead to an overall worse outcome for both parties involved—demonstrating a conflict between self-interest and collective interest.
Explanation:
The scenario you've described is a classic example of the Prisoner's Dilemma, a fundamental concept in game theory which demonstrates how two individuals might not cooperate even when it seems in their best interest to do so. When faced with the option to either snitch on their friend or remain silent, a person is conflicted between loyalty and self-preservation. The dilemma here is that regardless of what the other prisoner does, each prisoner's dominant strategy is to defect, i.e., to confess and betray the other.
In the context of Jane and Bill, if Jane trusts Bill to stay silent, she might be tempted to remain silent as well. However, if she believes Bill will confess, Jane's best move would, strategically speaking, be to confess too. This is because confessing is a dominant strategy for both parties; it is the best action regardless of what the other person decides to do. As such, the predicted outcome in game theory would often be both parties confessing, leading to a worse collective outcome (a longer sentence for both) than if both had cooperated by remaining silent.
