Thread by @JackieGSchneid

I'm about to join a panel on wargaming in 2020 with @becca_wasser @elliebartels. I'm discussing developments on wargaming w/in academia and I've decided to tweet my thoughts for those not attending. Thread below . . .

Why wargaming & academia? Academic wargaming was a large part of early nuclear research. Games led by Bloomfield and Schelling at MIT were fundamental to how we think about modern nuclear strategy. Check out @reidpauly's work in @Journal_IS

belfercenter.org/publication/wo…

How is wargaming different in academia?
1) No sponsor (Pro: freedom, Con: money)
2) No logistics tail (Pro: less onerous, Con: hard to run games at scale)
3) Different communities (Pro: less guild/more science, Con: Too positivist?)

Innovations that wargaming has brought to substantive knowledge within academia:
1) On drones and crisis escalation: @eriklg
2) On tactical nuclear use: @areddie89 @bethanygoldblum
3) On cyber & crisis stability: @drbvaler
4) On cyber & nuclear stability: my work w/@NWC_CIPI

Innovations that academia has brought to wargaming:
1) Iterations and generalizability
2) Virtual interfaces
3) Experimental methods
4) Difficult questions (i.e. politically fraught questions)

What is on the horizon for wargaming research and academia?
1) Testing expertise and the importance of the sample
2) Exploring the medium, virtual vs. in person vs. surveys
3) Player buy-in and external validity
4) New substantive knowledge: AI, biothreats, etc.

Check out the agenda for connections here (standard wargaming, this list is super light on women)

connections-wargaming.com/connections-20…