{"title":"Dynamic adverse selection with the best and the worst in mind","authors":"Pascal Toquebeuf","doi":"10.1016/j.mathsocsci.2025.102490","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This paper analyzes a dynamic adverse selection market where buyers hold ambiguous beliefs about seller quality, modeled using neo-additive Choquet capacities and updated via optimistic, pessimistic, and Generalized Bayesian rules. First, we show that the choice of updating heuristic has a direct and systematic effect on the severity of adverse selection. While the optimistic and pessimistic rules invariably mitigate or amplify the problem, respectively, the Generalized Bayesian rule’s impact is conditional, its trajectory toward collapse, efficiency, or a stable partial market depending on a persistent ‘tug-of-war’ between the buyer’s static ambiguity attitude and the evolving probabilistic evidence. Our second main finding is that these immediate effects compound over time, leading to fundamentally different market trajectories. The pessimistic rule can drive the market to complete collapse, the optimistic rule can foster full participation, and the Generalized Bayesian path depends on the interplay between the buyer’s attitude and the evolving evidence. We further analyze how baseline ambiguity and ambiguity aversion modulate these dynamics, uncovering a complex role for ambiguity in shaping the rate of market evolution.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51118,"journal":{"name":"Mathematical Social Sciences","volume":"139 ","pages":"Article 102490"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mathematical Social Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165489625001052","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/12/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This paper analyzes a dynamic adverse selection market where buyers hold ambiguous beliefs about seller quality, modeled using neo-additive Choquet capacities and updated via optimistic, pessimistic, and Generalized Bayesian rules. First, we show that the choice of updating heuristic has a direct and systematic effect on the severity of adverse selection. While the optimistic and pessimistic rules invariably mitigate or amplify the problem, respectively, the Generalized Bayesian rule’s impact is conditional, its trajectory toward collapse, efficiency, or a stable partial market depending on a persistent ‘tug-of-war’ between the buyer’s static ambiguity attitude and the evolving probabilistic evidence. Our second main finding is that these immediate effects compound over time, leading to fundamentally different market trajectories. The pessimistic rule can drive the market to complete collapse, the optimistic rule can foster full participation, and the Generalized Bayesian path depends on the interplay between the buyer’s attitude and the evolving evidence. We further analyze how baseline ambiguity and ambiguity aversion modulate these dynamics, uncovering a complex role for ambiguity in shaping the rate of market evolution.
期刊介绍:
The international, interdisciplinary journal Mathematical Social Sciences publishes original research articles, survey papers, short notes and book reviews. The journal emphasizes the unity of mathematical modelling in economics, psychology, political sciences, sociology and other social sciences.
Topics of particular interest include the fundamental aspects of choice, information, and preferences (decision science) and of interaction (game theory and economic theory), the measurement of utility, welfare and inequality, the formal theories of justice and implementation, voting rules, cooperative games, fair division, cost allocation, bargaining, matching, social networks, and evolutionary and other dynamics models.
Papers published by the journal are mathematically rigorous but no bounds, from above or from below, limits their technical level. All mathematical techniques may be used. The articles should be self-contained and readable by social scientists trained in mathematics.