ABSTRACT
A conspicuous difference between contract by convention in a Prisoner’s Dilemma and a coordination game convention is that the former requires a larger cognitive element. Mere behavioral learning may lead away from the likelihood of successful contract in Prisoner’s Dilemma situations, whereas it may be sufficient to induce the wayward to conform with newly arising coordination game conventions. Once established, either type of convention may be reinforced and sustained by behavioral motors in the absence of clear understanding of why the conventions are supported. But the motor that drives coordination games to conventional outcomes is absent from Prisoner’s Dilemma, except to the extent that the expected value to me of the effect of my contribution on the behavior of others is greater than zero.
