Scholars Gate
Find a TutorOnline Tutoring
GuidesHow It WorksBecome a Tutor
Log inGet Started
All guides
EconomicsUndergraduate 10 min read

Game Theory & the Nash Equilibrium

Set the payoffs in a 2×2 game and watch each player’s best responses highlight — then the cell where neither wants to move locks in as the Nash equilibrium.

The ScholarsGate Economics Team·Updated 03 Jul 2026

On this page

  • Choices that depend on others
  • Find the equilibrium
  • Best responses
  • The Nash equilibrium
  • The prisoner’s dilemma
  • Common mistakes
  • FAQ

Most economic decisions depend on what someone else will do. Game theory is the mathematics of those interdependent choices, and its central idea — the Nash equilibrium — is the point where no player wants to move. Enter payoffs into the grid below and watch it light up.

Choices that depend on others

A firm setting a price, two countries choosing whether to arm, flatmates deciding whether to wash up — each player’s best move depends on the others’ moves. We capture that in a payoff matrix: the rows are one player’s strategies, the columns the other’s, and each cell holds the pair of payoffs (Player A, Player B).

You can’t just pick your favourite outcome — you can only pick a strategy. The outcome is decided by both players at once.

Find the equilibrium

Edit any payoff and watch the analysis update live. Each player’s best responses are highlighted; a cell that is a best response for both players is a Nash equilibrium. Load the classic games and try to break the equilibrium by changing a single number.

InteractivePayoff matrix & Nash equilibrium
Loading interactive…
Edit the payoffs (higher = better). Highlighted numbers are best responses; a cell best for both players is the Nash equilibrium.
Text description ↓Hide text description ↑

An editable 2×2 payoff matrix. Player A chooses a row, Player B chooses a column, and each cell contains two editable payoffs (A’s, then B’s); higher numbers are better. For each column the tool highlights the row giving Player A the larger payoff (A’s best response), and for each row it highlights the column giving Player B the larger payoff (B’s best response). A cell highlighted for both players is a Nash equilibrium, labelled as such. Preset games include the prisoner’s dilemma (single equilibrium where both defect: 1, 1), the stag hunt (two equilibria), and the battle of the sexes (two equilibria).

Best responses and dominant strategies

A best response is the strategy that gives a player their highest payoff, taking the other player’s choice as fixed. To find Player A’s best response, cover Player B’s payoffs and, column by column, pick A’s larger number.

Dominant strategy

If one strategy is a best response no matter what the other player does, it is a dominant strategy. In the prisoner’s dilemma, “defect” is dominant for both players — which is exactly why they end up trapped there.

The Nash equilibrium

A Nash equilibrium is a combination of strategies where every player is simultaneously playing a best response — so no one can gain by unilaterally switching. On the grid, it is the cell where bothnumbers are highlighted. It is a resting point: given what everyone else is doing, you wouldn’t want to change.

A game can have one Nash equilibrium (prisoner’s dilemma), several (the stag hunt and battle of the sexes both have two in pure strategies), or none in pure strategies — in which case the equilibrium involves randomising, a mixed strategy.

The prisoner’s dilemma

Two suspects are questioned separately. Each can stay silent (cooperate) or confess (defect). Whatever the other does, confessing gives a better individual payoff — so both confess. Yet if both had stayed silent they’d both be better off.

Worked example — why the trap closes

Using the preset payoffs (higher = better): if your opponent cooperates, defecting gives you 5 instead of 3. If your opponent defects, defecting gives you 1 instead of 0. Defect wins in bothcolumns, so it’s dominant. Both reason identically, both defect, and they land on (1, 1) — worse for each than the (3, 3) they could have shared. Individually rational, collectively poor: the dilemma at the heart of cartels, arms races and climate negotiations.

Common mistakes

Picking the outcome with the biggest total payoff

The Nash equilibrium is notthe cell with the largest combined payoff. It is the cell no player can improve on alone. In the prisoner’s dilemma the highest-total cell (3, 3) is not the equilibrium at all.

Only checking one player

A cell is a Nash equilibrium only if it is a best response for both players. Check each independently — a best response for A alone is not enough.

Your turn

In a 2×2 game, both players have a dominant strategy. How many pure-strategy Nash equilibria must the game have, and where is it?

Show the answer ↓Hide the answer ↑

Exactly one, at the cell where both dominant strategies meet. Since each dominant strategy is a best response to everything, their intersection is automatically a best response for both — a Nash equilibrium.

Key takeaways
  • A payoff matrix shows each player’s payoff for every combination of strategies.
  • A best response maximises your payoff given the other player’s fixed choice; a dominant strategy is best against everything.
  • A Nash equilibrium is where all players play best responses — no one can gain by switching alone.
  • The prisoner’s dilemma shows individually rational choices can produce a collectively worse outcome.

Frequently asked questions

What is a Nash equilibrium?+
A Nash equilibrium is a set of strategies — one per player — where no player can do better by unilaterally changing their own strategy, given what the others are doing. Every player is simultaneously playing a best response to everyone else.
What is a dominant strategy?+
A dominant strategy is one that gives a player a higher payoff than any alternative, no matter what the other players do. If every player has a dominant strategy, the combination of those strategies is automatically a Nash equilibrium.
Why is the prisoner’s dilemma important?+
The prisoner’s dilemma shows that individually rational choices can lead to a collectively worse outcome. Both players defect because defecting is a dominant strategy, yet both would be better off cooperating — the Nash equilibrium is not the best joint result.
Can a game have more than one Nash equilibrium?+
Yes. Coordination games such as the "stag hunt" or "battle of the sexes" can have two or more Nash equilibria in pure strategies, and many games also have a Nash equilibrium in mixed strategies, where players randomise between options.
SE

The ScholarsGate Economics Team

Oxbridge & Russell Group economics tutors

Written and reviewed by ScholarsGate tutors who teach A-Level and undergraduate economics. Every explainer is checked against the AQA, Edexcel, OCR and Eduqas specifications.

Keep exploring

Undergraduate Economics tutorsSupply & demand equilibriumPrice elasticity of demandAll Economics tutors

Want a tutor to walk you through it?

Book a DBS-checked Undergraduate Economics tutor for a 1-on-1 lesson — online or in person.

Find a Undergraduate Economics tutor
Scholars GateTutoring & Learning

ScholarsGate (Scholars Gate) is a premium UK tutoring marketplace connecting ambitious students with expert tutors across every subject, level, and admissions pathway.

hello@scholarsgate.co.uk
+44 7544 736438
Bath, United Kingdom

Platform

  • Find a Tutor
  • Online Tutoring
  • How It Works
  • Become a Tutor
  • Interactive Guides
  • Blog
  • FAQ

Subjects

  • Mathematics & Computing
  • Natural Sciences
  • Humanities
  • Languages
  • All Subjects

Admissions

  • Medicine & UCAT
  • Maths (TMUA, STEP)
  • Law & LNAT
  • Statements & Interviews
  • All Admissions
4.9/5 average tutor rating
All tutors DBS verified
Secure payments via Stripe
500+ expert tutors

© 2026 ScholarsGate Ltd. All rights reserved.

Privacy PolicyTerms of ServiceCookie PolicySafeguarding