IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Interdependent security experiments


  • Aric P. Shafran

    () (California Polytechnic State University)


This paper analyzes the behavior of subjects in interdependent security experiments which exhibit strategic complementarity. In these experiments, subjects decide whether to pay to mitigate the risk of a loss, but the exact risk depends on the actions of other subjects. Two ranked equilibria exist, and the efficient equilibrium is for all agents to pay for the mitigation. Subjects in the interdependent security experiments rarely coordinate on the efficient equilibrium. Coordination is slightly more common in similar coordination games without the risk mitigation decision. The experiments also compare the effectiveness of two policies at inducing higher levels of mitigation.

Suggested Citation

  • Aric P. Shafran, 2010. "Interdependent security experiments," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 30(3), pages 1950-1962.
  • Handle: RePEc:ebl:ecbull:eb-10-00217

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Van Huyck, John B. & Cook, Joseph P. & Battalio, Raymond C., 1997. "Adaptive behavior and coordination failure," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 483-503, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Antonio Filippin & Paolo Crosetto, 2016. "A Reconsideration of Gender Differences in Risk Attitudes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(11), pages 3138-3160, November.
    2. Shafran, Aric P., 2012. "Learning in games with risky payoffs," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 354-371.
    3. Prante, Tyler & Little, Joseph M. & Jones, Michael L. & McKee, Michael & Berrens, Robert P., 2011. "Inducing private wildfire risk mitigation: Experimental investigation of measures on adjacent public lands," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(4), pages 415-431.

    More about this item


    experiments; coordination game; risk mitigation; interdependent security;

    JEL classification:

    • C9 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments
    • D8 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty


    Access and download statistics


    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:ebl:ecbull:eb-10-00217. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (John P. Conley). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.