We consider the design of a contest in which the prize may motivate not only productive efforts, but also some damaging aggressive behavior by contestants. The organizer must choose prizes and an enforcement regime defined as a limit on how much aggressiveness will be tolerated and the probability of inspection. When the value of contestants’ output is low, it may be optimal to motivate much less effort than first best because the prize spread necessary to induce higher effort necessitates a high level of enforcement, which is not worth the cost. On the other hand, when the output value is sufficiently high, it becomes optimal to offer a high prize spread to motivate substantial but still below first-best effort, with costly enforcement then being employed to constrain damaging aggressive behavior. Additionally, a less accurate inspection technology is associated with a tighter limit on aggressive behavior, and “zero tolerance” can be optimal if the aggressive behavior has no value.
{"title":"Optimal Contest Design When Policing Damaging Behavior","authors":"Scott M. Gilpatric, Ye Hong","doi":"10.3390/g14030048","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3390/g14030048","url":null,"abstract":"We consider the design of a contest in which the prize may motivate not only productive efforts, but also some damaging aggressive behavior by contestants. The organizer must choose prizes and an enforcement regime defined as a limit on how much aggressiveness will be tolerated and the probability of inspection. When the value of contestants’ output is low, it may be optimal to motivate much less effort than first best because the prize spread necessary to induce higher effort necessitates a high level of enforcement, which is not worth the cost. On the other hand, when the output value is sufficiently high, it becomes optimal to offer a high prize spread to motivate substantial but still below first-best effort, with costly enforcement then being employed to constrain damaging aggressive behavior. Additionally, a less accurate inspection technology is associated with a tighter limit on aggressive behavior, and “zero tolerance” can be optimal if the aggressive behavior has no value.","PeriodicalId":35065,"journal":{"name":"Games","volume":"14 1","pages":"48"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42441938","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In the Crawford–Sobel (uniform, quadratic utility) cheap-talk model, we consider a simple mediation scheme (a communication device) in which the informed agent reports one of the N possible elements of a partition to the mediator and then the mediator suggests one of the N actions to the uninformed decision-maker according to the probability distribution of the device. We show that no such simple mediated equilibrium can improve upon the unmediated N-partition Crawford–Sobel equilibrium when the preference divergence parameter (bias) is small.
{"title":"Simple Mediation in a Cheap-Talk Game","authors":"C. Ganguly, I. Ray","doi":"10.3390/g14030047","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3390/g14030047","url":null,"abstract":"In the Crawford–Sobel (uniform, quadratic utility) cheap-talk model, we consider a simple mediation scheme (a communication device) in which the informed agent reports one of the N possible elements of a partition to the mediator and then the mediator suggests one of the N actions to the uninformed decision-maker according to the probability distribution of the device. We show that no such simple mediated equilibrium can improve upon the unmediated N-partition Crawford–Sobel equilibrium when the preference divergence parameter (bias) is small.","PeriodicalId":35065,"journal":{"name":"Games","volume":"14 1","pages":"47"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48897397","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Manela Karunadasa, Katri K. Sieberg, Toni Tapani Kristian Jantunen
This experiment examines the relationship between payment systems and the quality and quantity of services provided in credence goods markets. By using a real-effort task to stimulate the decision making of service providers, the study finds that payment systems do indeed have an impact on service provision. Specifically, providers in fee-for-service systems over-provide, while those in salary systems under-provide services. Additionally, there is a lack of alignment between the services provided under fee-for-service and the actual needs of customers, resulting in a substantial loss of customer benefits under fee-for-service in comparison to under salary. The study also finds that providers in fee-for-service systems perform more faulty tasks than those in salary, indicating that they may prioritize quantity over quality in their services. As for insurance, the results of this study show no significant effect of insurance on the number of services provided; however, customers without insurance received significantly more faulty tasks. Based on these results, the study concludes that payment systems play an important role in determining the quality and quantity of services provided in credence goods markets. Overall, this study highlights the need for a better alignment between customer needs and services provided under fee-for-service systems.
{"title":"Payment Systems, Supplier-Induced Demand, and Service Quality in Credence Goods: Results from a Laboratory Experiment","authors":"Manela Karunadasa, Katri K. Sieberg, Toni Tapani Kristian Jantunen","doi":"10.3390/g14030046","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3390/g14030046","url":null,"abstract":"This experiment examines the relationship between payment systems and the quality and quantity of services provided in credence goods markets. By using a real-effort task to stimulate the decision making of service providers, the study finds that payment systems do indeed have an impact on service provision. Specifically, providers in fee-for-service systems over-provide, while those in salary systems under-provide services. Additionally, there is a lack of alignment between the services provided under fee-for-service and the actual needs of customers, resulting in a substantial loss of customer benefits under fee-for-service in comparison to under salary. The study also finds that providers in fee-for-service systems perform more faulty tasks than those in salary, indicating that they may prioritize quantity over quality in their services. As for insurance, the results of this study show no significant effect of insurance on the number of services provided; however, customers without insurance received significantly more faulty tasks. Based on these results, the study concludes that payment systems play an important role in determining the quality and quantity of services provided in credence goods markets. Overall, this study highlights the need for a better alignment between customer needs and services provided under fee-for-service systems.","PeriodicalId":35065,"journal":{"name":"Games","volume":"14 1","pages":"46"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41514754","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In the game of rock-paper-scissors with three players, this paper identifies conditions for a correlated equilibrium that differs from the mixed strategy Nash equilibrium and is evolutionarily stable. For this to occur, the correlation device attaches more probability to three-way ties and solo-winner outcomes than would result from the Nash equilibrium. The correlated equilibrium is evolutionarily stable because any mutant fares worse than a signal-following player when facing two players who follow their own correlated signals. The critical quality of the correlation device is to make this true both for potential mutants who would disobey their signal and instead choose the action which would beat the action signaled to the player, as well as for potential mutants who would deviate to the action that would be beaten by what the device signals to the player. These findings reveal how a strict correlated equilibrium can produce evolutionarily stable strategies for rock-paper-scissors with three players.
{"title":"Correlated Equilibrium and Evolutionary Stability in 3-Player Rock-Paper-Scissors","authors":"William C. Grant","doi":"10.3390/g14030045","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3390/g14030045","url":null,"abstract":"In the game of rock-paper-scissors with three players, this paper identifies conditions for a correlated equilibrium that differs from the mixed strategy Nash equilibrium and is evolutionarily stable. For this to occur, the correlation device attaches more probability to three-way ties and solo-winner outcomes than would result from the Nash equilibrium. The correlated equilibrium is evolutionarily stable because any mutant fares worse than a signal-following player when facing two players who follow their own correlated signals. The critical quality of the correlation device is to make this true both for potential mutants who would disobey their signal and instead choose the action which would beat the action signaled to the player, as well as for potential mutants who would deviate to the action that would be beaten by what the device signals to the player. These findings reveal how a strict correlated equilibrium can produce evolutionarily stable strategies for rock-paper-scissors with three players.","PeriodicalId":35065,"journal":{"name":"Games","volume":"14 1","pages":"45"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42897617","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Training in firms has an effect on the productivity of employees who receive the training, and depending on the production technology, on the other employees as well. Meanwhile, changing the remuneration structure within a team can change the stability of a team. In this paper, we apply the production games approach of cooperative game theory to analyze how training employees affects the stability of team structures and employee wages. Concretely, we apply coalition structures and the χ value. Our results are in line with the literature and numerous further research questions can be addressed based on our approach.
{"title":"Training, Abilities and the Structure of Teams","authors":"Tobias Hiller","doi":"10.3390/g14030044","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3390/g14030044","url":null,"abstract":"Training in firms has an effect on the productivity of employees who receive the training, and depending on the production technology, on the other employees as well. Meanwhile, changing the remuneration structure within a team can change the stability of a team. In this paper, we apply the production games approach of cooperative game theory to analyze how training employees affects the stability of team structures and employee wages. Concretely, we apply coalition structures and the χ value. Our results are in line with the literature and numerous further research questions can be addressed based on our approach.","PeriodicalId":35065,"journal":{"name":"Games","volume":"14 1","pages":"44"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47250465","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper theoretically studies the interaction between an informed borrower and an uninformed lender facing possible default of a loan application. The lender is motivated to invest cognitive resources before making a lending decision. If the regulatory fine is weak, it is impossible for a bad-debt borrower to fully disclose his situation in the application. In this case, when the likelihood of a bad debt is low, the borrower always claims that nothing in the application is wrong. Otherwise, the borrower randomizes between full disclosure and information suppression. The transaction cost of the lender’s pre-lending cognition increases with the default probability, as the default probability is small and decreases thereafter. Evidence from a peer-to-peer lending platform with 816,274 observations between 2012 and 2015 in the United States is largely consistent with our model implications.
{"title":"Strategic Information Suppression in Borrowing and Pre-Lending Cognition: Theory and Evidence","authors":"Zhongwen Chen, Xiaojian Zhao","doi":"10.3390/g14030043","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3390/g14030043","url":null,"abstract":"This paper theoretically studies the interaction between an informed borrower and an uninformed lender facing possible default of a loan application. The lender is motivated to invest cognitive resources before making a lending decision. If the regulatory fine is weak, it is impossible for a bad-debt borrower to fully disclose his situation in the application. In this case, when the likelihood of a bad debt is low, the borrower always claims that nothing in the application is wrong. Otherwise, the borrower randomizes between full disclosure and information suppression. The transaction cost of the lender’s pre-lending cognition increases with the default probability, as the default probability is small and decreases thereafter. Evidence from a peer-to-peer lending platform with 816,274 observations between 2012 and 2015 in the United States is largely consistent with our model implications.","PeriodicalId":35065,"journal":{"name":"Games","volume":"14 1","pages":"43"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48273083","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Autonomous driving (AV) technology has elicited discussion on social dilemmas where trade-offs between individual preferences, social norms, and collective interests may impact road safety and efficiency. In this study, we aim to identify whether social dilemmas exist in AVs’ sequential decision making, which we call “sequential driving dilemmas” (SDDs). Identifying SDDs in traffic scenarios can help policymakers and AV manufacturers better understand under what circumstances SDDs arise and how to design rewards that incentivize AVs to avoid SDDs, ultimately benefiting society as a whole. To achieve this, we leverage a social learning framework, where AVs learn through interactions with random opponents, to analyze their policy learning when facing SDDs. We conduct numerical experiments on two fundamental traffic scenarios: an unsignalized intersection and a highway. We find that SDDs exist for AVs at intersections, but not on highways.
{"title":"Social Learning for Sequential Driving Dilemmas","authors":"Xu Chen, Xuan Di, Zechu Li","doi":"10.3390/g14030041","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3390/g14030041","url":null,"abstract":"Autonomous driving (AV) technology has elicited discussion on social dilemmas where trade-offs between individual preferences, social norms, and collective interests may impact road safety and efficiency. In this study, we aim to identify whether social dilemmas exist in AVs’ sequential decision making, which we call “sequential driving dilemmas” (SDDs). Identifying SDDs in traffic scenarios can help policymakers and AV manufacturers better understand under what circumstances SDDs arise and how to design rewards that incentivize AVs to avoid SDDs, ultimately benefiting society as a whole. To achieve this, we leverage a social learning framework, where AVs learn through interactions with random opponents, to analyze their policy learning when facing SDDs. We conduct numerical experiments on two fundamental traffic scenarios: an unsignalized intersection and a highway. We find that SDDs exist for AVs at intersections, but not on highways.","PeriodicalId":35065,"journal":{"name":"Games","volume":"14 1","pages":"41"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42683220","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
When there is direct competition for a position of power (promotion, elected office, etc.), competitors are tempted to cheat to increase their chances of winning. If they do so successfully, then how they rationalize their cheating can determine how they treat the losers of the competition. In this paper, we explore how the winners of a promotion tournament treat the losers, using a two stage laboratory experiment run in Canada and the United Arab Emirates. In the first stage, subjects compete to earn the role of the dictator in a dictator game, which takes place in the second stage. We vary whether or not subjects can cheat during the competition. The results of the experiment can be summarized as follows: (1) cheating significantly increases altruism in some tournament winners, (2) winners who cheat the most are significantly less altruistic than winners who cheated only a little, (3) there are significant differences in cheating behavior across the two populations, and (4) cheating behavior can be at least partially attributed to differences in intelligence and beliefs across the two populations.
{"title":"First You Get the Money, Then You Get the Power: The Effect of Cheating on Altruism","authors":"David Johnson, J. Rogers","doi":"10.3390/g14030040","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3390/g14030040","url":null,"abstract":"When there is direct competition for a position of power (promotion, elected office, etc.), competitors are tempted to cheat to increase their chances of winning. If they do so successfully, then how they rationalize their cheating can determine how they treat the losers of the competition. In this paper, we explore how the winners of a promotion tournament treat the losers, using a two stage laboratory experiment run in Canada and the United Arab Emirates. In the first stage, subjects compete to earn the role of the dictator in a dictator game, which takes place in the second stage. We vary whether or not subjects can cheat during the competition. The results of the experiment can be summarized as follows: (1) cheating significantly increases altruism in some tournament winners, (2) winners who cheat the most are significantly less altruistic than winners who cheated only a little, (3) there are significant differences in cheating behavior across the two populations, and (4) cheating behavior can be at least partially attributed to differences in intelligence and beliefs across the two populations.","PeriodicalId":35065,"journal":{"name":"Games","volume":"14 1","pages":"40"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48928651","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The paper studies bargaining games involving players with present-biased preferences. The paper shows that the relative timing of bargaining rewards and bargaining costs will determine whether the players’ present-bias will affect bargaining outcomes. In cases where players agree to a bargain in period 1 and experience all bargaining payoffs in period 2, the players will act in a time-consistent fashion. When time-inconsistent players incur immediate bargaining costs to produce delayed rewards, they will have an incentive to procrastinate. On the other hand, when players receive immediate bargaining rewards and incur delayed costs, they will have incentives to agree to bargains too soon and to agree to inefficient bargains. The paper shows that the players’ awareness of their own and the other player’s present-biased preferences will determine whether they engage in repeated time-inconsistent bargaining. A naïve player who engages in time-inconsistent bargaining will suffer welfare losses. We show that time-inconsistent bargaining can also create spillover welfare losses for other players. A time-consistent player who is counterparty-naïve about the other player can suffer spillover welfare losses that can be higher than those incurred by the time-inconsistent player. As a result, counterparty-sophisticated players will have an incentive to use cross-commitment devices to reduce the likelihood of spillover welfare losses. The paper also shows that cross commitment devices that target immediate payoffs dominate cross-commitments that target delayed payoffs. Finally, the paper shows that time-inconsistent bargaining can lead to inefficient delays in agreeing to bargains and in exiting bargaining relationships.
{"title":"Time-Inconsistent Bargaining and Cross-Commitments","authors":"Manuel A. Utset","doi":"10.3390/g14030038","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3390/g14030038","url":null,"abstract":"The paper studies bargaining games involving players with present-biased preferences. The paper shows that the relative timing of bargaining rewards and bargaining costs will determine whether the players’ present-bias will affect bargaining outcomes. In cases where players agree to a bargain in period 1 and experience all bargaining payoffs in period 2, the players will act in a time-consistent fashion. When time-inconsistent players incur immediate bargaining costs to produce delayed rewards, they will have an incentive to procrastinate. On the other hand, when players receive immediate bargaining rewards and incur delayed costs, they will have incentives to agree to bargains too soon and to agree to inefficient bargains. The paper shows that the players’ awareness of their own and the other player’s present-biased preferences will determine whether they engage in repeated time-inconsistent bargaining. A naïve player who engages in time-inconsistent bargaining will suffer welfare losses. We show that time-inconsistent bargaining can also create spillover welfare losses for other players. A time-consistent player who is counterparty-naïve about the other player can suffer spillover welfare losses that can be higher than those incurred by the time-inconsistent player. As a result, counterparty-sophisticated players will have an incentive to use cross-commitment devices to reduce the likelihood of spillover welfare losses. The paper also shows that cross commitment devices that target immediate payoffs dominate cross-commitments that target delayed payoffs. Finally, the paper shows that time-inconsistent bargaining can lead to inefficient delays in agreeing to bargains and in exiting bargaining relationships.","PeriodicalId":35065,"journal":{"name":"Games","volume":"14 1","pages":"38"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48198289","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In transportation networks, incomplete information is ubiquitous, and users often delegate their route choice to distributed route planners. To model and study these systems, we introduce network control games, consisting of multiple actors seeking to optimise the social welfare of their assigned subpopulations through resource allocation in an underlying nonatomic congestion game. We first analyse the inefficiency of the routing equilibria by calculating the Price of Anarchy for polynomial cost functions, and then, using an Asynchronous Advantage Actor–Critic algorithm implementation, we show that reinforcement learning agents are vulnerable to choosing suboptimal routing as predicted by the theory. Finally, we extend the analysis to allow vehicles to choose their route planner and study the associated equilibria. Our results can be applied to mitigate inefficiency issues arising in large transport networks with route controlled autonomous vehicles.
{"title":"Fighting for Routes: Resource Allocation among Competing Planners in Transportation Networks","authors":"Charlotte Roman, P. Turrini","doi":"10.3390/g14030037","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3390/g14030037","url":null,"abstract":"In transportation networks, incomplete information is ubiquitous, and users often delegate their route choice to distributed route planners. To model and study these systems, we introduce network control games, consisting of multiple actors seeking to optimise the social welfare of their assigned subpopulations through resource allocation in an underlying nonatomic congestion game. We first analyse the inefficiency of the routing equilibria by calculating the Price of Anarchy for polynomial cost functions, and then, using an Asynchronous Advantage Actor–Critic algorithm implementation, we show that reinforcement learning agents are vulnerable to choosing suboptimal routing as predicted by the theory. Finally, we extend the analysis to allow vehicles to choose their route planner and study the associated equilibria. Our results can be applied to mitigate inefficiency issues arising in large transport networks with route controlled autonomous vehicles.","PeriodicalId":35065,"journal":{"name":"Games","volume":"14 1","pages":"37"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41583550","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：