Forget the complexity of the Prisoner's Dilemma. That's not necessary to get down cold in order to leverage game theory in a job search.
The only 1 thing lawyers and law students have to know is this fundamental: What counts is every move your competitors make. You configure your strategy and tactics based on what you know of those moves or what you can figure out they might be.
The point is that you never proceed in an isolated context. That is, you just don't present yourself without taking into account how others are presenting themselves. Given that, then you construct how to differentiate yourself - demonstrating your distinct edge.
For that reason, it is an advantage to know as much as possible who your competition is and the standard MO for me. However, the player or players could reverse course.
That happened during the competition between Alicia Florrick and Cary Agos on "The Good Wife" for the associate job for the second year. Agos assumed she would be naive, relying on her work product. Instead she made the move of asking partner Diane what could she do to keep her job. Diane advised using her contacts to bring in new business. That she did. She went on to the second year. Cary got knocked out of the box, at least for the interim.
You too can surprise your competition, doing an atypical move. The classic case is the JD from an elite school with top grades who presents herself as an extreme worker bee. All those metalinguistic factors such as body language communicate hunger, not entitlement. In itself those can get her noticed by interviewers.
So, in sizing up competitive moves take into account what would be standard and what would be a fresh tactic. Then in planning your own, create a gameplan the competition can't predict the moves for.