更改

零和博弈，尤其是它们的解决方案经常被[[博弈论]]的批评者误解，通常是关于参与者的独立性和[[理性选择理论|理性]]，以及对效用函数的解释。此外，“游戏”一词并不意味着该模型仅对娱乐[[游戏]]有效<ref name="Binmore2007">{{cite book|author=Ken Binmore|title=Playing for real: a text on game theory|url=https://books.google.com/?id=eY0YhSk9ujsC|year=2007|publisher=Oxford University Press US|isbn=978-0-19-530057-4|authorlink=Ken Binmore}}, chapters 1 & 7</ref>。

零和博弈，尤其是它们的解决方案经常被[[博弈论]]的批评者误解，通常是关于参与者的独立性和[[理性选择理论|理性]]，以及对效用函数的解释。此外，“游戏”一词并不意味着该模型仅对娱乐[[游戏]]有效<ref name="Binmore2007">{{cite book|author=Ken Binmore|title=Playing for real: a text on game theory|url=https://books.google.com/?id=eY0YhSk9ujsC|year=2007|publisher=Oxford University Press US|isbn=978-0-19-530057-4|authorlink=Ken Binmore}}, chapters 1 & 7</ref>。

政治有时被称为零和。<ref>{{cite news|last=Rubin |first=Jennifer |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2013/10/04/the-flaw-in-zero-sum-politics/ |title=The flaw in zero sum politics |newspaper=The Washington Post |date=2013-10-04 |accessdate=2017-03-08}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21595973-voters-think-both-parties-are-telling-truth-about-how-awful-other-lot-are-zero-sum |title=Lexington: Zero-sum politics |newspaper=The Economist |date=2014-02-08 |accessdate=2017-03-08}}</ref><ref>{{cite dictionary|url=http://www.dictionary.com/browse/zero-sum-game |title=Zero-sum game &#124; Define Zero-sum game at |dictionary=Dictionary.com |accessdate=2017-03-08}}</ref>

政治有时被称为零和。<ref>{{cite news|last=Rubin |first=Jennifer |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2013/10/04/the-flaw-in-zero-sum-politics/ |title=The flaw in zero sum politics |newspaper=The Washington Post |date=2013-10-04 |accessdate=2017-03-08}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21595973-voters-think-both-parties-are-telling-truth-about-how-awful-other-lot-are-zero-sum |title=Lexington: Zero-sum politics |newspaper=The Economist |date=2014-02-08 |accessdate=2017-03-08}}</ref>

== 零和思维==

== 零和思维==