Advice from Multiple Experts: A Comparison of Simultaneous, Sequential, and Hierarchical Communication
AbstractIn this paper, I analyze an example in which two perfectly informed experts advise a decision maker. Each expert has private information about her own bias. I show that consulting two experts is better than consulting just one. I compare the efficiency of information transmission between simultaneous, sequential, and hierarchical forms of communication. I show that simultaneous communication achieves the highest efficiency, followed by sequential and hierarchical communication. However, hierarchical communication, in which a second expert chooses whether to block the first expert's message, achieves a moderate level of efficiency, even though the decision maker receives only one message. Finally, there are preference settings in which both sequential and hierarchical communication are superior to simultaneous communication.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by De Gruyter in its journal The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics.
Volume (Year): 10 (2010)
Issue (Month): 1 (April)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.degruyter.com
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- McGee, Andrew & Yang, Huanxing, 2013. "Cheap talk with two senders and complementary information," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 181-191.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Peter Golla).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.