IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v306y2023i3p1330-1348.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Similarities, differences, and preservation of efficiencies, with application to attitude analysis, within the Graph Model for Conflict Resolution

Author

Listed:
  • Inohara, Takehiro

Abstract

Precise definitions of four efficiency concepts, one of which is newly defined in this paper, are provided. Similarities and differences among them are confirmed by propositions and examples. By using an analysis method, called attitude analysis, within the framework of the Graph Model for Conflict Resolution (GMCR), a proposition on preservation of efficiency with respect to permutation of attitudes is verified. The proposition and some examples give us an insight on roles of self-attitude preserving permutation of attitudes among members in a society for achieving compatibility between individual rationality and social efficiency in social dilemma situations such as Prisoner’s Dilemma and the Tragedy of the Commons.

Suggested Citation

  • Inohara, Takehiro, 2023. "Similarities, differences, and preservation of efficiencies, with application to attitude analysis, within the Graph Model for Conflict Resolution," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 306(3), pages 1330-1348.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:306:y:2023:i:3:p:1330-1348
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2022.09.038
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221722007640
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ejor.2022.09.038?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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mas-Colell, Andreu & Whinston, Michael D. & Green, Jerry R., 1995. "Microeconomic Theory," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195102680.
    2. Keith W. Hipel & Liping Fang & D. Marc Kilgour, 2020. "The Graph Model for Conflict Resolution: Reflections on Three Decades of Development," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 11-60, February.
    3. He, Shawei, 2022. "A time sensitive graph model for conflict resolution with application to international air carbon negotiation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 302(2), pages 652-670.
    4. D. Marc Kilgour & Keith W. Hipel & Liping Fang & Xiaoyong (John) Peng, 2001. "Coalition Analysis in Group Decision Support," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 159-175, March.
    5. Inohara, Takehiro, 2007. "Relational dominant strategy equilibrium as a generalization of dominant strategy equilibrium in terms of a social psychological aspect of decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 182(2), pages 856-866, October.
    6. Takehiro Inohara & Keith W. Hipel, 2008. "Coalition analysis in the graph model for conflict resolution," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(4), pages 343-359, December.
    7. Martin J. Osborne & Ariel Rubinstein, 1994. "A Course in Game Theory," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262650401, December.
    8. Davtalab-Olyaie, Mostafa & Asgharian, Masoud, 2021. "On Pareto-optimality in the cross-efficiency evaluation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 288(1), pages 247-257.
    9. Inohara, Takehiro, 2016. "State transition time analysis in the Graph Model for Conflict Resolution," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 274(C), pages 372-382.
    10. K. J. Arrow & A. K. Sen & K. Suzumura (ed.), 2002. "Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare," Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1.
    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. He, Shawei, 2022. "A time sensitive graph model for conflict resolution with application to international air carbon negotiation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 302(2), pages 652-670.
    2. List, Christian & Polak, Ben, 2010. "Introduction to judgment aggregation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(2), pages 441-466, March.
    3. Battigalli, Pierpaolo & Leonetti, Paolo & Maccheroni, Fabio, 2020. "Behavioral equivalence of extensive game structures," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 533-547.
    4. Thijssen, J.J.J., 2003. "Investment under uncertainty, market evolution and coalition spillovers in a game theoretic perspective," Other publications TiSEM 672073a6-492e-4621-8d4a-0, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    5. Daley, Brendan & Sadowski, Philipp, 2017. "Magical thinking: A representation result," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(2), May.
    6. Horaguchi, Haruo, 1996. "The role of information processing cost as the foundation of bounded rationality in game theory," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 51(3), pages 287-294, June.
    7. Albert Banal-Estañol & Inés Macho-Stadler, 2007. "Financial Incentives in Academia: Research versus Development," Working Papers 295, Barcelona School of Economics.
    8. Leandro Chaves Rêgo & Giannini Italino Alves Vieira, 2017. "Symmetric Sequential Stability in the Graph Model for Conflict Resolution with Multiple Decision Makers," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 775-792, July.
    9. Felix J. Bierbrauer & Pierre C. Boyer, 2016. "Efficiency, Welfare, and Political Competition," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 131(1), pages 461-518.
    10. Al-Mutairi, M.S. & Hipel, K.W. & Kamel, M.S., 2008. "Trust and cooperation from a fuzzy perspective," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 76(5), pages 430-446.
    11. Saša Zorc & Ilia Tsetlin, 2020. "Deadlines, Offer Timing, and the Search for Alternatives," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 68(3), pages 927-948, May.
    12. , & ,, 2013. "Implementation of communication equilibria by correlated cheap talk: The two-player case," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 8(1), January.
    13. Inohara, Takehiro, 2016. "State transition time analysis in the Graph Model for Conflict Resolution," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 274(C), pages 372-382.
    14. Claus-Jochen Haake & Tim Krieger & Steffen Minter, 2013. "On the institutional design of burden sharing when financing external border enforcement in the EU," International Economics and Economic Policy, Springer, vol. 10(4), pages 583-612, December.
    15. Huiye Ma & Nicole Ronald & Theo Arentze & Harry Timmermans, 2013. "Negotiating on location, timing, duration, and participant in agent-mediated joint activity-travel scheduling," Journal of Geographical Systems, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 427-451, October.
    16. Giacomo Bonanno, 2016. "Exploring the Gap between Perfect Bayesian Equilibrium and Sequential Equilibrium," Games, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-23, November.
    17. Alex Garivaltis, 2021. "Grade Inflation and Stunted Effort in a Curved Economics Course," Papers 2108.03709, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2021.
    18. Keith W. Hipel & Liping Fang & D. Marc Kilgour, 2020. "The Graph Model for Conflict Resolution: Reflections on Three Decades of Development," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 11-60, February.
    19. Hitoshi Matsushima, 2005. "On Detail‐Free Mechanism Design And Rationality," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 56(1), pages 41-54, March.
    20. Gömöri, András, 2005. "Nyugdíjrendszer és játékelmélet. Megjegyzések Mészáros József cikkéhez [The pension system and game theory. Remarks on the article by József Mészáros]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(7), pages 732-742.

    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:ejores:v:306:y:2023:i:3:p:1330-1348. 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/eor .

    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.