This is perhaps not the best example to illustrate the phenomenon. Consider, instead, the following game, also taken from Schelling:
A, B and C are given the labels A, B and C, and told to pick an ordering of the letters A, B and C. If they agree on the ordering, then the person whose letter is ranked first wins $4, the person whose letter is ranked second wins $2 and the person whose letter is third wins $1. Otherwise, no-one wins anything. The players are not allowed to communicate amongst themselves—what ordering should they pick?
Here, I think it is obvious that ABC is massively more salient than any other ordering. It is not completely obvious to me that “heads” is more obvious than “tails” in the OP.
This is perhaps not the best example to illustrate the phenomenon. Consider, instead, the following game, also taken from Schelling:
A, B and C are given the labels A, B and C, and told to pick an ordering of the letters A, B and C. If they agree on the ordering, then the person whose letter is ranked first wins $4, the person whose letter is ranked second wins $2 and the person whose letter is third wins $1. Otherwise, no-one wins anything. The players are not allowed to communicate amongst themselves—what ordering should they pick?
Here, I think it is obvious that ABC is massively more salient than any other ordering. It is not completely obvious to me that “heads” is more obvious than “tails” in the OP.
That’s a very good example.