Ross’s tactics have drawn the attention of those who study psychology and a branch of maths called game theory
Jonathan Ross’s punchy approach in the current series of The Celebrity Traitors might seem risky, but scientists who study strategic game playing say it is not as reckless as it seems.
His daring tactic, of murdering someone who had just accused him of being a traitor, is in fact rooted in a well-recognised strategy in game theory.
Experts in this branch of maths, which analyses decision making and strategic interactions, call Ross’s move “multi-level reasoning” and even a “suicide bluff”.
New Feature
In Short
Quick Stories. Same trusted journalism.
“Jonathan’s move only seems reckless if you judge it on its surface. Judged on its effect on others’ perceptions, it’s potentially optimal,” said Professor Leighton Vaughan Williams, an economist at Nottingham Business School. “Whether it continues to work depends on how many levels of reasoning the other contestants are prepared to engage in.”
For those who don’t watch Traitors, it involves a group of people spending several days in a Scottish castle, carrying out tasks to build up a pot of money. A few have been chosen to be traitors, and gather secretly at night to decide which of the others to boot from the show in a dramatic “murder”. The faithful contestants’ only defence is a daily public meeting to vote on who should be ejected as the most likely traitor.
The show, which is in its fourth UK series, is a serious business for experts in psychology, game theory, as well as game designers.
Universities using Traitors clips for teaching
“In our teaching, we use clips from The Traitors,” said Dr Clea Wright, a forensic psychologist at the University of Chester, who has a podcast about the show. “There are so many different psychological theories that are laid out there for us.”
“The show is a living laboratory for game theory,” said Professor Martin Gairing, a computer scientist at the University of Liverpool. “Every decision involves strategy, deception, and reputation building.”
Ross has been drawing attention because in episode three, he argued successfully for murdering the actress Ruth Codd, who had earlier accused him forcefully of being a traitor.
“I would be an idiot to kill Ruth. If I was a traitor, I would not have done this,” Ross told his co-conspirators that night.
Rugby star Joe Marler, right, is suspicious of Jonathan Ross (Photo: Euan Cherry/BBC/Studio Lambert)
The tactic has drawn interest, not just from contestants, but also from academic game theorists – whose work is used in computing, economics and even military strategy.
If the traitors selected people for murder at random, that would be termed Level 0 reasoning, said Dr Stephen Nei, an economist at the University of Exeter. Level 1 reasoning would be if Ross made the obvious move of murdering Codd because she was a threat. Level 2 reasoning would avoid Codd because she is too obvious. Ross has shifted up to Level 3 reasoning: killing her despite it implicating him.
Traitors need to work out at what level the faithful contestants are thinking, said Dr Nei. “Jonathan Ross seemingly correctly anticipated that he was talking to a Level 2 contestant.”
For future murders, the traitors should use a mix of different levels, he said. “They should not pick the obvious choice so often that they clearly reveal themselves, nor avoid the obvious option so often that they likewise reveal themselves.
A role he was born for (Photo: Euan Cherry/BBC/Studio Lambert)
“It’s similar to the idea of which way a footballer should shoot on a penalty kick; they have a stronger side – kicking left or right – which they should use more often, but not so often that the goalie knows for sure which way to dive.”
But we should not be too hard on those faithful who – at least for now – seem to have accepted Ross’s defence, said Dr Sören Henrich, a researcher in forensic psychology at Manchester Metropolitan University.
“As soon as we push past Level 1 reasoning, it gets really muggy, because our brain cannot hold all of that. In that castle, they’re not just doing that for Jonathan, they’re doing this for every other player, so it’s a lot to to keep on top of.”
Whether or not Ross survives any longer, game theory will stay relevant.
“It not only helps dissect headline-grabbing moves like Jonathan’s, but also illuminates the deep strategic currents underpinning social deduction gameplay,” said Professor Vaughan Williams, who has written about the show in his book Twisted Logic: Puzzles, Paradoxes, and Big Questions.
“Players’ choices, beliefs, and predictions form a rich tapestry of risk, reasoning, and social psychology, all of which we can examine through the lens of game theory.”
Werewolf game inspires Traitors
Some overseas versions of Traitors weave into the final episode a crucial game theory experiment called “Prisoner’s Dilemma” – also used in a different TV show Golden Balls.
In this, the final few players must opt to either share or steal the prize money. In game theory, it is seen as giving profound insights on why people often act selfishly.
In fact, the entire premise of The Traitors stems from a family of group strategy games where the goal is to “hunt the baddie”. They stem from the old parlour game Wink Murder, with later more complex forms called Mafia and Werewolf, as well as a phone app version called Among Us, set on a spaceship.
Such group games have long been popular at conferences for game theorists and coders, said Dr Douglas Brown, a researcher in game design at Falmouth University. “People have got jobs through being very good at Werewolf,” he said.
And the Traitors role of “seer” – when someone is granted temporary magical powers to discover if another person is traitor or faithful – introduced in the UK in series three, is an innovation that came from Werewolf.
In the current Celebrity Traitors series, the faithful may not need magical powers to know if Ross is engaged in an elaborate bluff, though.
Principles of psychology may come into play, including that of group thinking, our tendency to follow the crowd. If those who suspect Ross – like rugby player Joe Marler – manage to persuade one or two more to follow their lead, Ross’s time may be up. “There’s so much attention on Jonathan, I’d be surprised if he survives,” said Dr Wright.
