Cognition in Spatial Dispersion Games
AbstractIn common-interest spatial-dispersion games the agents common goal is to choose distinct locations.We experimentally investigate the role of cognition in such games and compare it with the role of cognition in spatial matching games. In our setup cognition matters because agents may be differentially aware of the dispersion opportunities that are created by the history of the game.We ask whether cognitive constraints limit the agents ability to achieve dispersion and, if there is dispersion, whether these constraints affect the mode by which agents achieve dispersion.Our main finding is that strategic interaction magnifies the role of cognitive constraints.Specifically, with cognitive constraints, pairs of agents fail to solve a dispersion problem that poses little or no problem for individual agents playing against themselves.When we remove the cognitive constraints in our design, pairs of agents solve the same problem just as well as individuals do.In addition, we find that when playing against themselves agents do not change the mode by which they solve the dispersion problem when our design removes the cognitive constraints.
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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research in its series Discussion Paper with number 2005-58.
Date of creation: 2005
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://center.uvt.nl
noncooperative games; laboratory group behavior;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
- C92 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Group Behavior
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2005-05-07 (All new papers)
- NEP-CBE-2005-05-07 (Cognitive & Behavioural Economics)
- NEP-EXP-2005-05-07 (Experimental Economics)
- NEP-GTH-2005-05-07 (Game Theory)
- NEP-URE-2005-05-07 (Urban & Real Estate Economics)
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Bhaskar, V., 2000. "Egalitarianism and Efficiency in Repeated Symmetric Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 247-262, August.
- Blume, Andreas & Gneezy, Uri, 2000.
"An Experimental Investigation of Optimal Learning in Coordination Games,"
Journal of Economic Theory,
Elsevier, vol. 90(1), pages 161-172, January.
- Blume, Andreas & Gneezy, Uri, 1998. "An Experimental Investigation of Optimal Learning in Coordination Games," Working Papers 98-10, University of Iowa, Department of Economics.
- Andreas Blume & Uri Gneezy, 1998. "An Experimental Investigation of Optimal Learning in Coordination Games," CIG Working Papers FS IV 98-12, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (WZB), Research Unit: Competition and Innovation (CIG).
- Steve Alpern & Diane Reyniers, 2002. "Spatial Dispersion as a Dynamic Coordination Problem," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 53(1), pages 29-59, August.
- Blume, Andreas, 2000.
"Coordination and Learning with a Partial Language,"
Journal of Economic Theory,
Elsevier, vol. 95(1), pages 1-36, November.
- Blume, Andreas, 1998. "Coordination and Learning with a Partial Language," Working Papers 98-11, University of Iowa, Department of Economics.
- Andreas Blume, 1998. "Coordination and Learning with a Partial Language," CIG Working Papers FS IV 98-11, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (WZB), Research Unit: Competition and Innovation (CIG).
- Blume, A. & DeJong, D.V. & Maier, M., 2005. "Learning Strategic Sophistication," Discussion Paper 2005-59, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
- Andreas Blume & Uri Gneezy, 2009.
"Cognitive Forward Induction and Coordination without Common Knowledge: An Experimental Study,"
346, University of Pittsburgh, Department of Economics, revised May 2009.
- Blume, Andreas & Gneezy, Uri, 2010. "Cognitive forward induction and coordination without common knowledge: An experimental study," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 68(2), pages 488-511, March.
- Eddie Dekel & Barton L. Lipman & Aldo Rustichini, 1998. "Standard State-Space Models Preclude Unawareness," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 66(1), pages 159-174, January.
- Palfrey, Thomas R, 1984. "Spatial Equilibrium with Entry," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(1), pages 139-56, January.
- John Geanakoplos, 1992. "Common Knowledge," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 6(4), pages 53-82, Fall.
- Amnon Rapoport & Alison King Chung Lo & Rami Zwick, 2001.
"Choice of Prizes Allocated by Multiple Lotteries with Endogenously Determined Probabilities,"
- Rapoport, Amnon & Chung Lo, Alison King & Zwick, Rami, 2002. "Choice of Prizes Allocated by Multiple Lotteries with Endogenously Determined Probabilities," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 180-206, January.
- Nagel, Rosemarie, 1995. "Unraveling in Guessing Games: An Experimental Study," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(5), pages 1313-26, December.
- Crawford, Vincent P & Haller, Hans, 1990. "Learning How to Cooperate: Optimal Play in Repeated Coordination Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 58(3), pages 571-95, May.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Richard Broekman).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.