实验对象玩的游戏:收益效用

G. Harrison, Theodore L. Turocy
{"title":"实验对象玩的游戏:收益效用","authors":"G. Harrison, Theodore L. Turocy","doi":"10.1145/1807406.1807485","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Experiments have been used to study the behavioural validity of the predictions of game theory. Unfortunately, almost all of the games studied by experimental economists require at least one maintained assumptions in order to interpret the payoffs faced by subjects as utilities: that the subject has a linear utility function defined over monetary payoffs. With some notable exceptions, experimental games reward subjects by giving them money. Money is not the same as utility, which is what game theory assumes payoffs to be defined in terms of. Moreover, linear transformations of money do not accurately reflect linear transformations of utility unless the subject is risk neutral. Since there is evidence that experimental subjects tend to behave as if risk averse over the domain of income involved in most experiments, there is a potential confound in the interpretation of behaviour in experimental games. This point is well known, in the sense that it is easy to find occasional references to it by careful students of experimental games. And there are some remarkable experimental designs that attempt to control for this confound. But there are also many experimental games in which the possibility of risk aversion makes inferences difficult, to say the least. The problem is that the experimenter has lost control of one of the fundamentals of the game, and simply cannot know with any certainty what utility payoffs the subject is facing. We follow Goeree, Holt and Palfrey GEB 2003, and propose joint econometric estimation of the utility function of individuals from behavior in an individual lottery choice task and in strategic games, where behavior in the latter is constrained to be a Quantal Response Equilibrium. We develop computational tools using GAMBIT and Stata to facilitate the maximum likelihood estimation of behavior in experimental games defined over utility. These tools are applied to evaluate behavior over a wide range of experimental games. Our approach generalizes to also allow for other specifications in which utility might not be the same as own-payoff, such as an allowance for social preferences.","PeriodicalId":142982,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral and Quantitative Game Theory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The games that experimental subjects play: the utility of payoffs\",\"authors\":\"G. Harrison, Theodore L. Turocy\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/1807406.1807485\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Experiments have been used to study the behavioural validity of the predictions of game theory. Unfortunately, almost all of the games studied by experimental economists require at least one maintained assumptions in order to interpret the payoffs faced by subjects as utilities: that the subject has a linear utility function defined over monetary payoffs. With some notable exceptions, experimental games reward subjects by giving them money. Money is not the same as utility, which is what game theory assumes payoffs to be defined in terms of. Moreover, linear transformations of money do not accurately reflect linear transformations of utility unless the subject is risk neutral. Since there is evidence that experimental subjects tend to behave as if risk averse over the domain of income involved in most experiments, there is a potential confound in the interpretation of behaviour in experimental games. This point is well known, in the sense that it is easy to find occasional references to it by careful students of experimental games. And there are some remarkable experimental designs that attempt to control for this confound. But there are also many experimental games in which the possibility of risk aversion makes inferences difficult, to say the least. The problem is that the experimenter has lost control of one of the fundamentals of the game, and simply cannot know with any certainty what utility payoffs the subject is facing. We follow Goeree, Holt and Palfrey GEB 2003, and propose joint econometric estimation of the utility function of individuals from behavior in an individual lottery choice task and in strategic games, where behavior in the latter is constrained to be a Quantal Response Equilibrium. We develop computational tools using GAMBIT and Stata to facilitate the maximum likelihood estimation of behavior in experimental games defined over utility. These tools are applied to evaluate behavior over a wide range of experimental games. Our approach generalizes to also allow for other specifications in which utility might not be the same as own-payoff, such as an allowance for social preferences.\",\"PeriodicalId\":142982,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Behavioral and Quantitative Game Theory\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-05-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Behavioral and Quantitative Game Theory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/1807406.1807485\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavioral and Quantitative Game Theory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/1807406.1807485","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

实验已经被用来研究博弈论预测的行为有效性。不幸的是,实验经济学家研究的几乎所有博弈都需要至少一个假设,以便将受试者所面临的收益解释为效用:即受试者具有优于货币收益的线性效用函数。除了一些明显的例外,实验游戏通过给他们钱来奖励他们。金钱不同于效用,而效用是博弈论假设的定义收益的标准。此外,货币的线性变换不能准确地反映效用的线性变换,除非主体是风险中性的。因为有证据表明,在大多数实验中,实验对象倾向于在收入范围内规避风险,所以在实验游戏中的行为解释中存在潜在的混淆。从某种意义上说,这一点是众所周知的,细心的实验游戏学生很容易发现偶尔会提到这一点。有一些出色的实验设计试图控制这种混淆。但至少可以说,在许多实验游戏中,风险厌恶的可能性使得推理变得困难。问题在于,实验者已经失去了对游戏基本原理的控制,无法确切地知道实验对象所面临的效用回报。我们遵循Goeree, Holt和Palfrey GEB 2003,并提出了个人在个人彩票选择任务中的行为和战略博弈中的行为的效用函数的联合计量经济学估计,后者的行为被约束为量子反应均衡。我们开发了使用GAMBIT和Stata的计算工具,以促进在效用定义的实验游戏中行为的最大似然估计。这些工具被用于评估各种实验游戏中的行为。我们的方法进行了一般化,以允许效用可能与自身收益不同的其他规范,例如对社会偏好的允许。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The games that experimental subjects play: the utility of payoffs
Experiments have been used to study the behavioural validity of the predictions of game theory. Unfortunately, almost all of the games studied by experimental economists require at least one maintained assumptions in order to interpret the payoffs faced by subjects as utilities: that the subject has a linear utility function defined over monetary payoffs. With some notable exceptions, experimental games reward subjects by giving them money. Money is not the same as utility, which is what game theory assumes payoffs to be defined in terms of. Moreover, linear transformations of money do not accurately reflect linear transformations of utility unless the subject is risk neutral. Since there is evidence that experimental subjects tend to behave as if risk averse over the domain of income involved in most experiments, there is a potential confound in the interpretation of behaviour in experimental games. This point is well known, in the sense that it is easy to find occasional references to it by careful students of experimental games. And there are some remarkable experimental designs that attempt to control for this confound. But there are also many experimental games in which the possibility of risk aversion makes inferences difficult, to say the least. The problem is that the experimenter has lost control of one of the fundamentals of the game, and simply cannot know with any certainty what utility payoffs the subject is facing. We follow Goeree, Holt and Palfrey GEB 2003, and propose joint econometric estimation of the utility function of individuals from behavior in an individual lottery choice task and in strategic games, where behavior in the latter is constrained to be a Quantal Response Equilibrium. We develop computational tools using GAMBIT and Stata to facilitate the maximum likelihood estimation of behavior in experimental games defined over utility. These tools are applied to evaluate behavior over a wide range of experimental games. Our approach generalizes to also allow for other specifications in which utility might not be the same as own-payoff, such as an allowance for social preferences.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信