Game Theory and its Use in the Prevention of Spread of Disease
Relevant Links:
- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7584231/
- https://theconversation.com/game-theory-can-help-prevent-disease-outbreaks-102934
With the rise of COVID-19 in 2020 and its highly contagious nature, countries around the world had to take quick actions to prevent its spread. Yet, government response alone is not enough for a pandemic to contain itself. It is necessary for the residents of the country to also abide by these laws and take actions to prevent themselves from contracting the disease and spreading it to the community around them. By taking up all these responsibilities, both the government and the citizens of the country pay some cost, whether that is the monetary value of paying for better healthcare facilities or the mental cost of isolating oneself from family and friends.
One example of this is the decision of people to vaccinate themselves against COVID or any other disease. Once the COVID vaccine was released, people were skeptical about the after effects of the vaccine, given the speed at which the vaccine was created and tested. Additionally, taking the vaccine meant leaving one’s home and exposing themselves to other people, who may be contagious, suffering the pain from the injection, and dealing with the after effects of the immune response towards the vaccine. All of these are events that an individual may not want to go through, yet if they did, then it would benefit the public health and well-being. Utilizing game theory in such cases shows that, decisions that would be made when one keeps in mind only an individual’s costs and benefits of taking precautions to disease (such as vaccination and isolation) could lead to decisions are contrary to the well-being of the public.
Additionally, in the research paper “Game analysis on the evolution of COVID-19 epidemic under the prevention and control measures of the government,” we see that game theory is used to prove that the best response solution to a pandemic is for the government to actively respond to the spread of disease and invest in the required resources, and for the residents of the country to also abide by these precautions and isolate to prevent the spread of disease (when the objective is to promote overall well-being and increase safety against the pandemic). This was proven true despite the costs that the government and the people have to suffer in the process. The paper also lists various methods to decrease the public’s cost, one of which is reducing misinformation about the disease and treatments. (Funnily enough, this paper could also act as a source of information that can educate people about the best way to approach the pandemic, and change their individual responses to the pandemic, and convince them to isolate and stay safe!)
In the paper [1], in order to set up the tabular form of the game that determines the best response in the face of a pandemic, the researchers stated that the government would either respond to the pandemic or would be indifferent to it and that the public would either actively isolate themselves or would be non-compliant with the government-issued rules for the pandemic. They then calculated the probabilities of each possible situation and determined that the best response to the pandemic is when the government responds to the pandemic and the public actively isolates. For context, following is link for the game theory table that they put in the paper: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7584231/table/pone.0240961.t001/
These paper [1] and its research relates to our course because it puts into context the use of concepts such as game theory and prisoner’s dilemma. It allows us to understand that game theory can be applied to the spread of COVID-19 by helping us understand how to curb a pandemic and why people don’t take vaccinations despite the obvious (and economically proved using game theory) advantage of taking it towards public safety. Thus, we learn to appreciate that situations in life and the motivations behind them are more complicated than we perceive them to be. The paper described above is essential to informing people of the ideal future response to widespread disease and how to attain it.