IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/wpaper/halshs-01368067.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The effect of sequentiality and heterogeneity in network formation games

Author

Listed:
  • Liza Charroin

    (GATE Lyon Saint-Étienne - Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon - Saint-Etienne - ENS de Lyon - École normale supérieure de Lyon - UL2 - Université Lumière - Lyon 2 - UCBL - Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1 - Université de Lyon - UJM - Université Jean Monnet - Saint-Étienne - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, UL2 - Université Lumière - Lyon 2)

Abstract

In the benchmark model of Bala and Goyal (2000) on network formation, the equilibrium network is asymmetric and unfair as agents have different payoffs. While they are prominent in reality, asymmetric networks do not emerge in the lab mainly because of fairness concerns. We extend this model with a sequential linking decision process to ease coordination and with heterogeneous agents. Heterogeneity is introduced with the presence of a special agent who has either a higher monetary value or a different status. The equilibrium is asymmetric and unfair. Our experimental results show that thanks to sequentiality and fairness concerns, individuals coordinate on fair and efficient networks in homogeneous settings. Heterogeneity impacts the network formation process by increasing the asymmetry of networks but does not decrease the level of fairness nor efficiency.

Suggested Citation

  • Liza Charroin, 2016. "The effect of sequentiality and heterogeneity in network formation games," Working Papers halshs-01368067, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:wpaper:halshs-01368067
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-01368067
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-01368067/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Barabási, Albert-László & Albert, Réka & Jeong, Hawoong, 2000. "Scale-free characteristics of random networks: the topology of the world-wide web," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 281(1), pages 69-77.
    2. Rong, Rong & Houser, Daniel, 2015. "Growing stars: A laboratory analysis of network formation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 380-394.
    3. Catherine Eckel & Rick Wilson, 2007. "Social learning in coordination games: does status matter?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(3), pages 317-329, September.
    4. Falk Armin & Kosfeld Michael, 2012. "It's all about Connections: Evidence on Network Formation," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 11(3), pages 1-36, September.
    5. Rosenkranz, Stephanie & Weitzel, Utz, 2012. "Network structure and strategic investments: An experimental analysis," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 898-920.
    6. Berno Buechel & Tim Hellmann, 2012. "Under-connected and over-connected networks: the role of externalities in strategic network formation," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 16(1), pages 71-87, March.
    7. repec:cup:judgdm:v:6:y:2011:i:8:p:771-781 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Todd L. Cherry & Peter Frykblom & Jason F. Shogren, 2002. "Hardnose the Dictator," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(4), pages 1218-1221, September.
    9. Herings, P. Jean-Jacques & Mauleon, Ana & Vannetelbosch, Vincent, 2009. "Farsightedly stable networks," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 526-541, November.
    10. Goeree, Jacob K. & Riedl, Arno & Ule, Aljaz, 2009. "In search of stars: Network formation among heterogeneous agents," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 445-466, November.
    11. Fabio Galeotti & Daniel Zizzo, 2014. "What happens if you single out? An experiment," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 43(3), pages 703-729, October.
    12. Weiss, Yoram & Fershtman, Chaim, 1998. "Social status and economic performance:: A survey," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(3-5), pages 801-820, May.
    13. Marco Mantovani & Georg Kirchsteiger & Ana Mauleon & Vincent Vannetelbosch, 2011. "Myopic or Farsighted? An Experiment on Network Formation," Working Papers 2011.45, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    14. Siegfried Berninghaus & Karl-Martin Ehrhart & Marion Ott, 2006. "A network experiment in continuous time: The influence of link costs," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 9(3), pages 237-251, September.
    15. Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, 1999. "A Theory of Fairness, Competition, and Cooperation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(3), pages 817-868.
    16. Venkatesh Bala & Sanjeev Goyal, 2000. "A Noncooperative Model of Network Formation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(5), pages 1181-1230, September.
    17. Galeotti, Andrea & Goyal, Sanjeev & Kamphorst, Jurjen, 2006. "Network formation with heterogeneous players," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 353-372, February.
    18. Andrea Galeotti & Sanjeev Goyal, 2010. "The Law of the Few," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(4), pages 1468-1492, September.
    19. Uri Gneezy & Jan Potters, 1997. "An Experiment on Risk Taking and Evaluation Periods," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(2), pages 631-645.
    20. David Gill & Victoria Prowse, 2012. "A Structural Analysis of Disappointment Aversion in a Real Effort Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(1), pages 469-503, February.
    21. Sanjeev Goyal & Sumit Joshi, 2006. "Unequal connections," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 34(3), pages 319-349, October.
    22. Siegfried Berninghaus & Karl-Martin Ehrhart & Marion Ott & Bodo Vogt, 2007. "Evolution of networks—an experimental analysis," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 317-347, June.
    23. Callander, Steven & Plott, Charles R., 2005. "Principles of network development and evolution: an experimental study," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(8), pages 1469-1495, August.
    24. Boris van Leeuwen & Theo Offerman & Arthur Schram, 2020. "Competition for Status Creates Superstars: an Experiment on Public Good Provision and Network Formation," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 18(2), pages 666-707.
    25. Sheryl Ball & Catherine Eckel & Philip J. Grossman & William Zame, 2001. "Status in Markets," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 116(1), pages 161-188.
    26. Dennie van Dolder & Vincent Buskens, 2014. "Individual Choices in Dynamic Networks: An Experiment on Social Preferences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(4), pages 1-16, April.
    27. Thayer Morrill, 2011. "Network formation under negative degree-based externalities," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 40(2), pages 367-385, May.
    28. Matteo Galizzi & Michele Bernasconi, 2005. "Coordination in Networks Formation: Experimental Evidence on Learning and Salience," Working Papers 2005.107, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    29. Yann Bramoullé & Brian W. Rogers, 2009. "Diversity and Popularity in Social Networks," Cahiers de recherche 0903, CIRPEE.
    30. Bock, Olaf & Baetge, Ingmar & Nicklisch, Andreas, 2014. "hroot: Hamburg Registration and Organization Online Tool," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 117-120.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Arthur Schram & Boris Van Leeuwen & Theo Offerman, 2013. "Superstars Need Social Benefits: An Experiment on Network Formation," Working Papers 1306, Departament Empresa, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, revised Jul 2013.
    2. Boris van Leeuwen & Theo Offerman & Arthur Schram, 2020. "Competition for Status Creates Superstars: an Experiment on Public Good Provision and Network Formation," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 18(2), pages 666-707.
    3. Mariya Teteryatnikova & James Tremewan, 2020. "Myopic and farsighted stability in network formation games: an experimental study," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 69(4), pages 987-1021, June.
    4. Gergely Horvath & Mofei Jia, 2024. "The impact of social status on the formation of collaborative ties and effort provision: An experimental study," Papers 2403.05830, arXiv.org.
    5. Falk Armin & Kosfeld Michael, 2012. "It's all about Connections: Evidence on Network Formation," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 11(3), pages 1-36, September.
    6. Carrillo, Juan & Gaduh, Arya, 2012. "The Strategic Formation of Networks: Experimental Evidence," CEPR Discussion Papers 8757, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    7. Kirchsteiger, Georg & Mantovani, Marco & Mauleon, Ana & Vannetelbosch, Vincent, 2016. "Limited farsightedness in network formation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 97-120.
    8. Carrillo, Juan D. & Gaduh, Arya, 2021. "Dynamics and stability of social and economic networks: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 1144-1176.
    9. Rong, Rong & Houser, Daniel, 2015. "Growing stars: A laboratory analysis of network formation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 380-394.
    10. Mariya Teteryatnikova & James Tremewan, 2015. "Stability in Network Formation Games with Streams of Payoffs: An Experimental Study," Vienna Economics Papers 1508, University of Vienna, Department of Economics.
    11. Mariya Teteryatnikova & James Tremewan, 2015. "Stability in Network Formation Games with Streams of Payoffs: An Experimental Study," Vienna Economics Papers vie1508, University of Vienna, Department of Economics.
    12. Choi, S. & Goyal, G. & Moisan, F., 2020. "Large Scale Experiments on Networks: A New Platform with Applications," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 2063, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    13. Doğan, Gönül, 2018. "Collusion in a buyer–seller network formation game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 445-457.
    14. Choi, S. & Goyal, S. & Guo, F. & Moisan, F., 2024. "Experimental Evidence on Group Size Effects in Network Formation Games," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 2417, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    15. Sanjeev Goyal & Stephanie Rosenkranz & Utz Weitzel & Vincent Buskens, 2017. "Information Acquisition and Exchange in Social Networks," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 127(606), pages 2302-2331, November.
    16. Doğan, Gönül & van Assen, Marcel & Potters, Jan, 2013. "The effect of link costs on simple buyer–seller networks," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 229-246.
    17. Anna Conte & Daniela T. Di Cagno & Emanuela Sciubba, 2015. "Behavioral Patterns In Social Networks," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 53(2), pages 1331-1349, April.
    18. Choi, S & Goyal, S. & Moisan, F., 2019. "Connectors and Influencers," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1935, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    19. Dennie van Dolder & Vincent Buskens, 2014. "Individual Choices in Dynamic Networks: An Experiment on Social Preferences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(4), pages 1-16, April.
    20. Choi, S. & Goyal, S. & Guo, F. & Moisan, F., 2024. "Experimental Evidence on Group Size Effects in Network Formation Games," Janeway Institute Working Papers 2412, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Network formation; sequentiality; heterogeneity; fairness; asymmetry;
    All these keywords.

    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
    • D85 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Network Formation
    • Z13 - Other Special Topics - - Cultural Economics - - - Economic Sociology; Economic Anthropology; Language; Social and Economic Stratification

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:wpaper:halshs-01368067. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.