IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jeborg/v71y2009i2p89-97.html

The local best response criterion: An epistemic approach to equilibrium refinement

Author

Listed:
  • Gintis, Herbert

Abstract

The standard refinement criteria for extensive form games, including subgame perfect, perfect, perfect Bayesian, sequential, and proper, reject important classes of reasonable Nash equilibria and accept many unreasonable Nash equilibria. This paper develops a new refinement criterion, based on epistemic game theory, that captures the concept of a Nash equilibrium that is plausible when players are rational. I call this the local best response (LBR) criterion. This criterion is conceptually simpler than the standard refinement criteria because it does not depend on out-of-equilibrium, counterfactual, or passage to the limit arguments. The LBR is also informationally richer because it clarifies the epistemic conditions that render a Nash equilibrium reasonable. The LBR criterion appears to render the traditional refinement criteria superfluous.

Suggested Citation

  • Gintis, Herbert, 2009. "The local best response criterion: An epistemic approach to equilibrium refinement," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 89-97, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jeborg:v:71:y:2009:i:2:p:89-97
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167-2681(09)00076-6
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Carlsson, Hans & van Damme, Eric, 1993. "Global Games and Equilibrium Selection," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(5), pages 989-1018, September.
    3. Blume, Lawrence E & Zame, William R, 1994. "The Algebraic Geometry of Perfect and Sequential Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(4), pages 783-794, July.
    4. Binmore, Ken & Samuelson, Larry, 2006. "The evolution of focal points," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 21-42, April.
    5. Rosenthal, Robert W., 1981. "Games of perfect information, predatory pricing and the chain-store paradox," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 92-100, August.
    6. McLennan, Andrew, 1985. "Justifiable Beliefs in Sequential Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 53(4), pages 889-904, July.
    7. Vega-Redondo,Fernando, 2003. "Economics and the Theory of Games," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521772518, Enero-Abr.
    8. Ben-Porath, Elchanan & Dekel, Eddie, 1992. "Signaling future actions and the potential for sacrifice," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 36-51.
    9. Kohlberg, Elon & Mertens, Jean-Francois, 1986. "On the Strategic Stability of Equilibria," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 54(5), pages 1003-1037, September.
    10. Kreps, David M & Wilson, Robert, 1982. "Sequential Equilibria," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(4), pages 863-894, July.
    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. Asha Sadanand, 2019. "Ideal Reactive Equilibrium," Games, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-18, April.

    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. Ehud Kalai & Dov Samet, 1986. "Are Bayesian-Nash Incentives and Implementations Perfect?," Discussion Papers 680, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    2. Sexton, Richard J., 1991. "Game Theory: A Review With Applications To Vertical Control In Agricultural Markets," Working Papers 225865, University of California, Davis, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    3. David Sally, 2002. "`What an Ugly Baby!'," Rationality and Society, , vol. 14(1), pages 78-108, February.
    4. Jin, Ye & Zhou, Zhen & Brandenburger, Adam, 2023. "Coordination via delay: Theory and experiment," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 23-49.
    5. van Damme, E.E.C., 2015. "Game theory : Noncooperative games," Other publications TiSEM ff518f2b-501f-4d99-817b-c, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    6. Andrés Perea & Elias Tsakas, 2019. "Limited focus in dynamic games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 48(2), pages 571-607, June.
    7. Keser Claudia & Gaudeul Alexia, 2016. "Foreword: Special Issue in Honor of Reinhard Selten’s 85th Birthday," German Economic Review, De Gruyter, vol. 17(3), pages 277-283, August.
    8. Oyama, Daisuke & Tercieux, Olivier, 2009. "Iterated potential and robustness of equilibria," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(4), pages 1726-1769, July.
    9. Demichelis, Stefano & Ritzberger, Klaus, 2003. "From evolutionary to strategic stability," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 113(1), pages 51-75, November.
    10. Bo Chen & Rajat Deb, 2018. "The role of aggregate information in a binary threshold game," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 51(3), pages 381-414, October.
    11. Anke Gerbery & Thorsten Hensz & Bodo Vogtx, 2010. "Rational Investor Sentimentina Repeated Stochastic Game with Imperfect Monitoring," Post-Print hal-00911824, HAL.
    12. Lensberg, Terje & Schenk-Hoppé, Klaus Reiner, 2021. "Cold play: Learning across bimatrix games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 419-441.
    13. Dilmé, Francesc, 2025. "Iterated exclusion of implausible types in signaling games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 293-312.
    14. Balkenborg, Dieter & Vermeulen, Dries, 2019. "On the topology of the set of Nash equilibria," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 1-6.
    15. Carlos Pimienta & Cristian Litan, 2008. "Conditions for equivalence between sequentiality and subgame perfection," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 35(3), pages 539-553, June.
    16. Atsushi Kajii & Stephen Morris, 2020. "Correction to: Refinements and higher-order beliefs: a unified survey," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 71(2), pages 351-351, April.
    17. Meroni, Claudia & Pimienta, Carlos, 2017. "The structure of Nash equilibria in Poisson games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 128-144.
    18. R. J. Aumann & J. H. Dreze, 2005. "When All is Said and Done, How Should You Play and What Should You Expect?," Discussion Paper Series dp387, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
    19. Ritzberger, Klaus & Weibull, Jörgen W. & Wikman, Peter, 2025. "Solid outcomes in finite games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 224(C).
    20. Kalai, E & Neme, A, 1992. "The Strength of a Little Perfection," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 20(4), pages 335-355.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    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:jeborg:v:71:y:2009:i:2:p:89-97. 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/jebo .

    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.