How Does Game Theory Affect Disease Outbreaks?
Link to article: https://theconversation.com/game-theory-can-help-prevent-disease-outbreaks-102934
Disease can easily spread from one individual to another, but understanding how individuals interact to one another correlates directly to game theory. Specifically, this article sheds light on the game theory behind vaccinations, and how two different groups choose their strategies. For instance, a family faced with the decision of receiving a flu vaccination must decide if the benefits of receiving this vaccination outweigh the negative costs. The obvious benefit of receiving a flu vaccination is long-term protection from the disease. Whereas, the negative costs of receiving a flu vaccination include a financial burden, possible pain from the needle injection, and a short-term reaction from one’s immune system. The other group involved in this “game” is the general public who is faced with the same choice to receive the flu vaccination or not. If almost everybody in the population receives a flu vaccination, then the family is relatively safe from getting the flu and not getting the flu vaccination might seem like the optimal strategy. If every family thinks in this way, then the whole population is at a greater risk of getting the flu. This is how outbreaks and wide spread disease occurs. We have seen this throughout history in diseases such as measles. The outbreak of a disease boils down to the perception of risk and actions taken by individuals and the total population. Stepping away from the “strategy” aspect of this “game,” ethically from a humane perspective, individuals should get vaccinated because there exists little to no risk from their standpoint and significant benefits for the overall population.
Furthermore, this article touches upon travel restrictions put in place by governments to prevent the spread of disease. Specifically, the travel restrictions during the outbreak of Ebola in West Africa. The article states that from game theory perspective it would seem like travel restrictions were instrumental in containing the disease and preventing the spread to other countries. However, researchers demonstrated that the prevention of travel only delayed the spread of the disease. Through, our game theory “lens,” the travel restrictions obviously protected millions of people from contracting the disease, but if these travel restrictions were lifted humanitarian workers could have facilitated in those areas. The humanitarian workers, or the individuals, in this case could have easily contracted the disease since they were exposed to the disease. These examples demonstrate how the optimal strategy for an individual conflicts with the optimal strategy of a whole group. Although we should not view tragic situations, like this example, as a “game,” strategy from the world population (in this case the governments) and the humanitarian workers comes into play here and affects each differently.
As the article comes to an end, it delves into the case when individual and group interests match. Once again, the situation presented pertained to traveling to an area that was affected by disease. If there was a greater risk of contracting the disease and it was publicized by the government and media, then individuals would be less likely to travel. This would coincide with the government’s plan for a travel ban. However, if the disease was not severe and was not publicized heavily, then individuals would want to travel and the government would have no need for a travel ban. We can clearly see that the government’s (population) interests match the travelers (individuals) interests in this situation.
Whether we realize it or not, game theory plays a vital role in how individuals react to one another. The way one individual chooses a strategy completely affects the way the other individual will react because each would like to choose the best or optimal strategy. Remarkably, the concept of game theory applies in our everyday lives without us realizing. The applications range from the decisions made by two tennis players in a match to the decisions made by travelers and governments as we examined in this article.