自政治學/國際關係學理論常有關於學科屬性是否為「科學」之爭論。傳統國際關係與政治行為研究主要以案例研究為基礎，又分外交史研究、體系模型研究、文化心理研究三種解釋路徑。準此，本研究嘗試製造實驗情境，以「模擬」方法，設計受試者扮演決策者，彼此談判互動，並以此互動記錄作為研究資料，並藉此檢証「戰略三角理論」。在論文中試圖討論三個子題：其一、這種模擬與理論的關係，在方法論上是否可能成立？其二、在這些模擬情境中，是否能再檢証（verification）國際關係學中的理論？其三也是最後一點，本文亦試圖討論這些情境與模擬的預測性與限制性。

There are always disputes with if political science / international relations theories has ＂scientificity＂. Since research scope of national government level is too large to be representated, international relations and diplomatic behavior research is mainly based on case studies of diplomatic history, system model, or psychological analysis. Therefore, whether it has the ＂scientific facor＂ -- including ＂universal, repeatability and predictability＂ ---- is a common cause of academic debate. This study attempts to manufacture experimental conditions in order to ＂simulating＂ approach, designed a player to play ＂deciders＂, who negotiates interact with each other, and writes interactive record as research datas. In the paper, author attempts to discuss the three sub-themes: firstly, the relationship between this simulation and theory, the possibility of the establishment of the methodology? Secondly, in the context of these simulations, whether it can confirm the theory of international relations? Thirdly, we also tried to discuss these scenarios and predictive modeling and restrictive, and trying to academic discussion, ＂Political Science / International Relations＂ as a discipline, which is its meta-theory.