IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolet/v153y2017icp61-64.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Perturbed best response dynamics in a hawk–dove game

Author

Listed:
  • Benndorf, Volker
  • Martínez-Martínez, Ismael

Abstract

We examine the impact of behavioral noise on equilibrium selection in a hawk–dove game with a model that linearly interpolates between the one- and two-population structures in an evolutionary context. Perturbed best response dynamics generates two hypotheses in addition to the bifurcation predicted by standard replicator dynamics. First, when replicator dynamics suggests mixing behavior (close to the one-population model), there will be a bias against hawkish play. Second, polarizing behavior as predicted by replicator dynamics in the vicinity of the two-population model will be less extreme in the presence of behavioral noise. We find both effects in our data set.

Suggested Citation

  • Benndorf, Volker & Martínez-Martínez, Ismael, 2017. "Perturbed best response dynamics in a hawk–dove game," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 61-64.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:153:y:2017:i:c:p:61-64
    DOI: 10.1016/j.econlet.2017.01.026
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016517651730037X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.econlet.2017.01.026?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christoph Brunner & Colin F. Camerer & Jacob K. Goeree, 2011. "Stationary Concepts for Experimental 2 X 2 Games: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(2), pages 1029-1040, April.
    2. Timothy N. Cason & Daniel Friedman & ED Hopkins, 2014. "Cycles and Instability in a Rock--Paper--Scissors Population Game: A Continuous Time Experiment," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 81(1), pages 112-136.
    3. Philip A. Haile & Ali Hortaçsu & Grigory Kosenok, 2008. "On the Empirical Content of Quantal Response Equilibrium," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(1), pages 180-200, March.
    4. Blume Lawrence E., 1993. "The Statistical Mechanics of Strategic Interaction," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 387-424, July.
    5. James Pettit & Daniel Friedman & Curtis Kephart & Ryan Oprea, 2014. "Software for continuous game experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 17(4), pages 631-648, December.
    6. Mäs, Michael & Nax, Heinrich H., 2016. "A behavioral study of “noise” in coordination games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 195-208.
    7. Oprea, Ryan & Henwood, Keith & Friedman, Daniel, 2011. "Separating the Hawks from the Doves: Evidence from continuous time laboratory games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 146(6), pages 2206-2225.
    8. McKelvey Richard D. & Palfrey Thomas R., 1995. "Quantal Response Equilibria for Normal Form Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 6-38, July.
    9. Ed Hopkins, 2002. "Two Competing Models of How People Learn in Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(6), pages 2141-2166, November.
    10. Josef Hofbauer & William H. Sandholm, 2002. "On the Global Convergence of Stochastic Fictitious Play," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(6), pages 2265-2294, November.
    11. Jacob Goeree & Charles Holt & Thomas Palfrey, 2005. "Regular Quantal Response Equilibrium," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 8(4), pages 347-367, December.
    12. Reinhard Selten & Thorsten Chmura & Sebastian J. Goerg, 2011. "Stationary Concepts for Experimental 2 X 2 Games: Reply," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(2), pages 1041-1044, April.
    13. Jacob K. Goeree & Charles A. Holt & Thomas R. Palfrey, 2016. "Quantal Response Equilibrium:A Stochastic Theory of Games," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 10743.
    14. Reinhard Selten & Thorsten Chmura, 2008. "Stationary Concepts for Experimental 2x2-Games," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(3), pages 938-966, June.
    15. Qian Zhuang & Zengru Di & Jinshan Wu, 2014. "Stability of Mixed-Strategy-Based Iterative Logit Quantal Response Dynamics in Game Theory," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(8), pages 1-16, August.
    16. Young, H. Peyton, 2011. "Commentary: John Nash and evolutionary game theory," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 12-13, January.
    17. Hofbauer, Josef & Hopkins, Ed, 2005. "Learning in perturbed asymmetric games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 133-152, July.
    18. Friedman, Daniel, 1991. "Evolutionary Games in Economics," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(3), pages 637-666, May.
    19. Benndorf, Volker & Martínez-Martínez, Ismael & Normann, Hans-Theo, 2016. "Equilibrium selection with coupled populations in hawk–dove games: Theory and experiment in continuous time," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 472-486.
    20. Alós-Ferrer, Carlos & Netzer, Nick, 2010. "The logit-response dynamics," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 68(2), pages 413-427, March.
    21. Lim, Wooyoung & Neary, Philip R., 2016. "An experimental investigation of stochastic adjustment dynamics," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 208-219.
    22. Mäs, Michael & Nax, Heinrich H., 2016. "A behavioral study of “noise” in coordination games," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 65422, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Stephenson, Daniel, 2019. "Coordination and evolutionary dynamics: When are evolutionary models reliable?," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 381-395.
    2. Zhao, Shuchen, 2021. "Taking turns in continuous time," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 257-279.
    3. Benndorf, Volker & Martínez-Martínez, Ismael & Normann, Hans-Theo, 2021. "Games with coupled populations: An experiment in continuous time," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    4. Céline Bonnet & Jan Philip Schain, 2020. "An Empirical Analysis Of Mergers: Efficiency Gains And Impact On Consumer Prices," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(1), pages 1-35.

    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. Benndorf, Volker & Martínez-Martínez, Ismael & Normann, Hans-Theo, 2021. "Games with coupled populations: An experiment in continuous time," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    2. Jonathan Newton, 2018. "Evolutionary Game Theory: A Renaissance," Games, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-67, May.
    3. Benndorf, Volker & Martínez-Martínez, Ismael & Normann, Hans-Theo, 2016. "Equilibrium selection with coupled populations in hawk–dove games: Theory and experiment in continuous time," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 472-486.
    4. Lim, Wooyoung & Neary, Philip R., 2016. "An experimental investigation of stochastic adjustment dynamics," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 208-219.
    5. Golman, Russell, 2012. "Homogeneity bias in models of discrete choice with bounded rationality," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 1-11.
    6. Alan Kirman & François Laisney & Paul Pezanis-Christou, 2018. "Exploration vs Exploitation, Impulse Balance Equilibrium and a specification test for the El Farol bar problem," School of Economics and Public Policy Working Papers 2018-11, University of Adelaide, School of Economics and Public Policy.
    7. Russell, Golman, 2011. "Quantal response equilibria with heterogeneous agents," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 146(5), pages 2013-2028, September.
    8. Zhang, Boyu & Hofbauer, Josef, 2016. "Quantal response methods for equilibrium selection in 2×2 coordination games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 19-31.
    9. Alan Kirman & François Laisney & Paul Pezanis-Christou, 2023. "Relaxing the symmetry assumption in participation games: a specification test for cluster-heterogeneity," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 26(4), pages 850-878, September.
    10. Hwang, Sung-Ha & Rey-Bellet, Luc, 2021. "Positive feedback in coordination games: Stochastic evolutionary dynamics and the logit choice rule," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 355-373.
    11. Funai, Naoki, 2022. "Reinforcement learning with foregone payoff information in normal form games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 638-660.
    12. Jakub Bielawski & Thiparat Chotibut & Fryderyk Falniowski & Michal Misiurewicz & Georgios Piliouras, 2022. "Unpredictable dynamics in congestion games: memory loss can prevent chaos," Papers 2201.10992, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2022.
    13. Hwang, Sung-Ha & Lim, Wooyoung & Neary, Philip & Newton, Jonathan, 2018. "Conventional contracts, intentional behavior and logit choice: Equality without symmetry," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 273-294.
    14. Sawa, Ryoji, 2019. "Stochastic stability under logit choice in coalitional bargaining problems," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 633-650.
    15. Chmura, Thorsten & Goerg, Sebastian J. & Selten, Reinhard, 2012. "Learning in experimental 2×2 games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 44-73.
    16. Friedman, Daniel & Zhao, Shuchen, 2021. "When are mixed equilibria relevant?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 51-65.
    17. Külpmann, Philipp & Kuzmics, Christoph, 2022. "Comparing theories of one-shot play out of treatment," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    18. Nax, Heinrich Harald & Newton, Jonathan, 2022. "Deep and shallow thinking in the long run," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 17(4), November.
    19. Mäs, Michael & Nax, Heinrich H., 2016. "A behavioral study of “noise” in coordination games," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 65422, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    20. Stephenson, Daniel, 2019. "Coordination and evolutionary dynamics: When are evolutionary models reliable?," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 381-395.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Evolutionary game theory; Perturbed best response dynamics; Experiment in continuous time; Hawk–dove game;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C62 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Existence and Stability Conditions of Equilibrium
    • C73 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Stochastic and Dynamic Games; Evolutionary Games
    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • C92 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Group Behavior

    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:eee:ecolet:v:153:y:2017:i:c:p:61-64. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolet .

    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.