IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/gamebe/v157y2026icp592-618.html

Quantal response equilibrium as a structural model for estimation: The missing manual

Author

Listed:
  • Bland, James R.
  • Turocy, Theodore L.

Abstract

One of the original objectives of the (logit) quantal response equilibrium (LQRE) model was to provide a method for structural estimation of behavior in games, when behavior deviated from Nash equilibrium predictions. To date, only Chapter 6 of the book on quantal response equilibrium by Goeree et al. (2016) focuses on how such estimation can be implemented. We build on that chapter to provide here a more detailed treatment of the methodological issues of implementing maximum likelihood estimation of QRE. We compare the equilibrium correspondence and empirical payoff approaches to estimation, and identify some considerations in interpreting the results of those approaches when applied to the same data on the same game. We also provide a more detailed “field guide” to using numerical continuation methods to accomplish estimation, including guidance on how to tailor implementations to games with different structures.

Suggested Citation

  • Bland, James R. & Turocy, Theodore L., 2026. "Quantal response equilibrium as a structural model for estimation: The missing manual," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 592-618.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:gamebe:v:157:y:2026:i:c:p:592-618
    DOI: 10.1016/j.geb.2025.02.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899825625000211
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.geb.2025.02.008?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jose Apesteguia & Miguel A. Ballester, 2018. "Monotone Stochastic Choice Models: The Case of Risk and Time Preferences," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 126(1), pages 74-106.
    2. John C. Harsanyi & Reinhard Selten, 1988. "A General Theory of Equilibrium Selection in Games," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262582384, December.
    3. Breitmoser, Yves, 2019. "Knowing me, imagining you: Projection and overbidding in auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 423-447.
    4. Bland, James R., 2019. "How many games are we playing? An experimental analysis of choice bracketing in games," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 80-91.
    5. Kenneth L. Judd, 1998. "Numerical Methods in Economics," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262100711, December.
    6. Camerer, Colin & Nunnari, Salvatore & Palfrey, Thomas R., 2016. "Quantal response and nonequilibrium beliefs explain overbidding in maximum-value auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 243-263.
    7. Goeree, Jacob K. & Holt, Charles A. & Palfrey, Thomas R., 2002. "Quantal Response Equilibrium and Overbidding in Private-Value Auctions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 104(1), pages 247-272, May.
    8. Simon P. Anderson & Jacob K. Goeree & Charles A. Holt, 1998. "Rent Seeking with Bounded Rationality: An Analysis of the All-Pay Auction," Springer Books, in: Roger D. Congleton & Arye L. Hillman & Kai A. Konrad (ed.), 40 Years of Research on Rent Seeking 1, pages 225-250, Springer.
    9. Ochs Jack, 1995. "Games with Unique, Mixed Strategy Equilibria: An Experimental Study," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 202-217, July.
    10. John Morgan & Henrik Orzen & Martin Sefton, 2012. "Endogenous entry in contests," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 51(2), pages 435-463, October.
    11. Goeree, Jacob K. & Holt, Charles A. & Palfrey, Thomas R., 2003. "Risk averse behavior in generalized matching pennies games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 97-113, October.
    12. Guillaume R. Fréchette & Alessandro Lizzeri & Jacopo Perego, 2022. "Rules and Commitment in Communication: An Experimental Analysis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 90(5), pages 2283-2318, September.
    13. Ge, Ge & Godager, Geir, 2021. "Predicting strategic medical choices: An application of a quantal response equilibrium choice model," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    14. Richard McKelvey & Thomas Palfrey, 2015. "Erratum to: Quantal response equilibria for extensive form games," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(4), pages 762-763, December.
    15. Govindan, Srihari & Wilson, Robert, 2003. "A global Newton method to compute Nash equilibria," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 110(1), pages 65-86, May.
    16. Turocy, Theodore L., 2005. "A dynamic homotopy interpretation of the logistic quantal response equilibrium correspondence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 243-263, May.
    17. 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.
    18. Yefen Chen & Xuanming Su & Xiaobo Zhao, 2012. "Modeling Bounded Rationality in Capacity Allocation Games with the Quantal Response Equilibrium," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(10), pages 1952-1962, October.
    19. Zhang, Boyu, 2016. "Quantal response methods for equilibrium selection in normal form games," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 113-123.
    20. Theodore Turocy, 2010. "Computing sequential equilibria using agent quantal response equilibria," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 42(1), pages 255-269, January.
    21. Anderson, Simon P. & Goeree, Jacob K. & Holt, Charles A., 1998. "A theoretical analysis of altruism and decision error in public goods games," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 297-323, November.
    22. Reinhard Selten & Thorsten Chmura, 2008. "Stationary Concepts for Experimental 2x2-Games," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(3), pages 938-966, June.
    23. 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.
    24. Patrick Bajari & Ali Hortacsu, 2005. "Are Structural Estimates of Auction Models Reasonable? Evidence from Experimental Data," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 113(4), pages 703-741, August.
    25. Theodore L. Turocy & Timothy N. Cason, 2015. "Bidding in first-price and second-price interdependent-values auctions: A laboratory experiment," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Behavioural and Experimental Social Science (CBESS) 15-23, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    26. Jiang, Albert Xin & Leyton-Brown, Kevin, 2015. "Polynomial-time computation of exact correlated equilibrium in compact games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 347-359.
    27. 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, December.
    28. Nobuyuki Hanaki & Aidas Masiliunas, 2021. "Market Concentration and Incentives to Collude in Cournot Oligopoly Experiments," ISER Discussion Paper 1131, Institute of Social and Economic Research, The University of Osaka.
    29. Govindan, Srihari & Wilson, Robert, 2004. "Computing Nash equilibria by iterated polymatrix approximation," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 28(7), pages 1229-1241, April.
    30. Bnaya Dreyfuss & Ori Heffetz & Matthew Rabin, 2022. "Expectations-Based Loss Aversion May Help Explain Seemingly Dominated Choices in Strategy-Proof Mechanisms," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 14(4), pages 515-555, November.
    31. Mailath George J. & Samuelson Larry & Swinkels Jeroen M., 1994. "Normal Form Structures in Extensive Form Games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 325-371, December.
    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. Cao, Yiyin & Dang, Chuangyin, 2022. "A variant of Harsanyi's tracing procedures to select a perfect equilibrium in normal form games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 127-150.
    2. Compte, Olivier, 2026. "Endogenous barriers to learning," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 440-463.
    3. Kendall, Ryan, 2021. "Sequential competitions with a middle-mover advantage," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    4. Turocy, Theodore L., 2005. "A dynamic homotopy interpretation of the logistic quantal response equilibrium correspondence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 243-263, May.
    5. Theodore L. Turocy, 2002. "A Dynamic Homotopy Interpretation of Quantal Response Equilibrium Correspondences," Game Theory and Information 0212001, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 16 Oct 2003.
    6. 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.
    7. Breitmoser, Yves, 2019. "Knowing me, imagining you: Projection and overbidding in auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 423-447.
    8. P. Herings & Ronald Peeters, 2010. "Homotopy methods to compute equilibria in game theory," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 42(1), pages 119-156, January.
    9. 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.
    10. Yiyin Cao & Chuangyin Dang & Yixiong Yu, 2025. "Efficient Differentiable Path-Following Methods for Computing Nash Equilibria," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 66(6), pages 5155-5188, December.
    11. Jorge Alcalde-Unzu & Flip Klijn & Marc Vorsatz, 2023. "Constrained school choice: an experimental QRE analysis," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 61(3), pages 587-624, October.
    12. Christoph Kuzmics & Daniel Rodenburger, 2020. "A case of evolutionarily stable attainable equilibrium in the laboratory," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 70(3), pages 685-721, October.
    13. Charles A. Holt, 2003. "Economic Science: An Experimental Approach for Teaching and Research," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 69(4), pages 754-771, April.
    14. Lim, Wooyoung & Matros, Alexander & Turocy, Theodore L., 2014. "Bounded rationality and group size in Tullock contests: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 155-167.
    15. Jiayang Li & Zhaoran Wang & Yu Marco Nie, 2023. "Wardrop Equilibrium Can Be Boundedly Rational: A New Behavioral Theory of Route Choice," Papers 2304.02500, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2024.
    16. Breitmoser, Yves & Tan, Jonathan H.W. & Zizzo, Daniel John, 2014. "On the beliefs off the path: Equilibrium refinement due to quantal response and level-k," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 102-125.
    17. Klein Teeselink, Bouke & van Dolder, Dennie & van den Assem, Martijn J. & Dana, Jason D., 2026. "High-stakes failures of backward induction," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 418-439.
    18. Breitmoser, Yves, 2010. "Hierarchical Reasoning versus Iterated Reasoning in p-Beauty Contest Guessing Games," MPRA Paper 19893, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Breitmoser, Yves, 2017. "Knowing Me, Imagining You:," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 36, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    20. Simon P. Anderson & Jacob K. Goeree & Charles A. Holt, 2002. "The Logit Equilibrium: A Perspective on Intuitive Behavioral Anomalies," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 69(1), pages 21-47, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C63 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Computational Techniques
    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • C90 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - General

    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:gamebe:v:157:y:2026:i:c:p:592-618. 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/inca/622836 .

    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.