测试战略不确定性模型:重复博弈中的均衡选择

IF 3.9 2区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Marta Boczoń, Emanuel Vespa, Taylor Weidman, Alistair J Wilson
{"title":"测试战略不确定性模型:重复博弈中的均衡选择","authors":"Marta Boczoń, Emanuel Vespa, Taylor Weidman, Alistair J Wilson","doi":"10.1093/jeea/jvae042","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In repeated games, where both collusive and noncollusive outcomes can be supported as equilibria, it is crucial to understand the likelihood of selection for each type of equilibrium. Controlled experiments have empirically validated a selection criterion for the two-player repeated prisoner’s dilemma: the basin of attraction for always defect. This prediction device uses the game primitives to measure the set of beliefs for which an agent would prefer to unconditionally defect rather than attempt conditional cooperation. This belief measure reflects strategic uncertainty over others’ actions, where the prediction is for noncooperative outcomes when the basin measure is full, and cooperative outcomes when empty. We expand this selection notion to multi-player social dilemmas and experimentally test the predictions, manipulating both the total number of players and the payoff tensions. Our results affirm the model as a tool for predicting long-term cooperation, while also speaking to some limitations when dealing with first-time encounters.","PeriodicalId":48297,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the European Economic Association","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Testing Models of Strategic Uncertainty: Equilibrium Selection in Repeated Games\",\"authors\":\"Marta Boczoń, Emanuel Vespa, Taylor Weidman, Alistair J Wilson\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jeea/jvae042\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In repeated games, where both collusive and noncollusive outcomes can be supported as equilibria, it is crucial to understand the likelihood of selection for each type of equilibrium. Controlled experiments have empirically validated a selection criterion for the two-player repeated prisoner’s dilemma: the basin of attraction for always defect. This prediction device uses the game primitives to measure the set of beliefs for which an agent would prefer to unconditionally defect rather than attempt conditional cooperation. This belief measure reflects strategic uncertainty over others’ actions, where the prediction is for noncooperative outcomes when the basin measure is full, and cooperative outcomes when empty. We expand this selection notion to multi-player social dilemmas and experimentally test the predictions, manipulating both the total number of players and the payoff tensions. Our results affirm the model as a tool for predicting long-term cooperation, while also speaking to some limitations when dealing with first-time encounters.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48297,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the European Economic Association\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the European Economic Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jeea/jvae042\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the European Economic Association","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jeea/jvae042","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在重复博弈中,合谋和非合谋结果都可以作为均衡点,因此了解每种均衡点的选择可能性至关重要。受控实验从经验上验证了双人重复囚徒困境的选择标准:总是缺陷的吸引力盆地。这种预测方法利用博弈基元来衡量代理人宁愿无条件叛逃而不愿尝试有条件合作的信念集合。这种信念度量反映了对他人行动的战略不确定性,当盆地度量为满时,预测结果为非合作,当盆地度量为空时,预测结果为合作。我们将这一选择概念扩展到多人社会困境中,并通过实验检验了预测结果,同时操纵了参与者总数和报酬张力。我们的结果肯定了该模型是预测长期合作的工具,同时也指出了它在处理初次相遇时的一些局限性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Testing Models of Strategic Uncertainty: Equilibrium Selection in Repeated Games
In repeated games, where both collusive and noncollusive outcomes can be supported as equilibria, it is crucial to understand the likelihood of selection for each type of equilibrium. Controlled experiments have empirically validated a selection criterion for the two-player repeated prisoner’s dilemma: the basin of attraction for always defect. This prediction device uses the game primitives to measure the set of beliefs for which an agent would prefer to unconditionally defect rather than attempt conditional cooperation. This belief measure reflects strategic uncertainty over others’ actions, where the prediction is for noncooperative outcomes when the basin measure is full, and cooperative outcomes when empty. We expand this selection notion to multi-player social dilemmas and experimentally test the predictions, manipulating both the total number of players and the payoff tensions. Our results affirm the model as a tool for predicting long-term cooperation, while also speaking to some limitations when dealing with first-time encounters.
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
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
2.80%
发文量
63
期刊介绍: Journal of the European Economic Association replaces the European Economic Review as the official journal of the association. JEEA publishes articles of the highest scientific quality and is an outlet for theoretical and empirical work with global relevance. The journal is committed to promoting the ambitions of the EEA: the development and application of economics as a science, as well as the communication and exchange between teachers, researchers and students in economics.
×
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