The Bateson Game: A Model of Strategic Ambiguity, Frame Uncertainty, and Pathological Learning

This paper introduces the Bateson Game, a signaling game in which ambiguity over the governing rules of interaction (interpretive frames), rather than asymmetry of information about player types, drives strategic outcomes. We formalize the communication paradox of the “double bind” by defining a class of games where a Receiver acts under uncertainty about the operative frame, while the Sender possesses private information about the true frame, benefits from manipulation, and penalizes attempts at meta-communication (clarification). We prove that the game’s core axioms preclude the existence of a separating Perfect Bayesian Equilibrium. More significantly, we show that under boundedly rational learning dynamics, the Receiver’s beliefs can become locked into one of two pathological states, depending on the structure of the Sender’s incentives. If the Sender’s incentives are cyclical, the system enters a persistent oscillatory state (an “ambiguity trap”). If the Sender’s incentives align with reinforcing a specific belief or if the Sender has a dominant strategy, the system settles into a stable equilibrium (a “certainty trap”), characterized by stable beliefs dictated by the Sender. We present a computational analysis contrasting these outcomes, demonstrating empirically how different parametrizations lead to either trap. The Bateson Game provides a novel game-theoretic foundation for analyzing phenomena such as deceptive AI alignment and institutional gaslighting, demonstrating how ambiguity can be weaponized to create durable, exploitative strategic environments.