IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/mateco/v49y2013i6p496-500.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Weakly rational expectations

Author

Listed:
  • Hellman, Ziv

Abstract

Aumann and Drèze (2008) characterised the set of interim expected payoffs that players may have in rational belief systems, in which there is common knowledge of rationality and a common prior. We show here that common knowledge of rationality is not needed: when rationality is satisfied in the support of an action-consistent distribution (a concept introduced by Barelli (2009)), one obtains exactly the same set of rational expectations, despite the fact that in such ‘weakly rational belief systems’ there may not be mutual knowledge of rationality, let alone common knowledge of rationality. In the special case of two-player zero-sum games, the only expected payoff is the minmax value, even under these weak assumptions.

Suggested Citation

  • Hellman, Ziv, 2013. "Weakly rational expectations," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(6), pages 496-500.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:mateco:v:49:y:2013:i:6:p:496-500
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jmateco.2013.10.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304406813000931
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jmateco.2013.10.001?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. Hellman, Ziv & Samet, Dov, 2012. "How common are common priors?," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 74(2), pages 517-525.
    2. Robert J. Aumann & Jacques H. Dreze, 2008. "Rational Expectations in Games," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(1), pages 72-86, March.
    3. Samet, Dov, 1998. "Common Priors and Separation of Convex Sets," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 24(1-2), pages 172-174, July.
    4. Feinberg, Yossi, 2000. "Characterizing Common Priors in the Form of Posteriors," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 127-179, April.
    5. Bach, Christian W. & Tsakas, Elias, 2014. "Pairwise epistemic conditions for Nash equilibrium," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 48-59.
    6. Barelli, Paulo, 2009. "Consistency of beliefs and epistemic conditions for Nash and correlated equilibria," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 363-375, November.
    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. Florian Brandl & Felix Brandt, 2023. "A Robust Characterization of Nash Equilibrium," Papers 2307.03079, arXiv.org.

    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. Rodrigues-Neto, José Alvaro, 2012. "The cycles approach," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 207-211.
    2. Dekel, Eddie & Siniscalchi, Marciano, 2015. "Epistemic Game Theory," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,, Elsevier.
    3. Christian W. Bach & Jérémie Cabessa, 2023. "Lexicographic agreeing to disagree and perfect equilibrium," Post-Print hal-04271274, HAL.
    4. Ziv Hellman, 2014. "Countable spaces and common priors," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 43(1), pages 193-213, February.
    5. Martin Hellwig, 2011. "Incomplete-Information Models of Large Economies with Anonymity: Existence and Uniqueness of Common Priors," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2011_08, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    6. Hellwig, Martin F., 2013. "From posteriors to priors via cycles: An addendum," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 118(3), pages 455-458.
    7. Ziv Hellman, 2013. "Almost common priors," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 42(2), pages 399-410, May.
    8. Guarino, Pierfrancesco & Tsakas, Elias, 2021. "Common priors under endogenous uncertainty," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    9. Bach, Christian W. & Perea, Andrés, 2020. "Two definitions of correlated equilibrium," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 12-24.
    10. Hellman, Ziv, 2011. "Iterated expectations, compact spaces, and common priors," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 163-171, May.
    11. Ziv Hellman & Miklós Pintér, 2022. "Charges and bets: a general characterisation of common priors," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 51(3), pages 567-587, November.
    12. José Alvaro Rodrigues-Neto, 2012. "Cycles of length two in monotonic models," ANU Working Papers in Economics and Econometrics 2012-587, Australian National University, College of Business and Economics, School of Economics.
    13. Martins-da-Rocha, V. Filipe, 2010. "Interim efficiency with MEU-preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(5), pages 1987-2017, September.
    14. Hellwig, Martin, 2022. "Incomplete-information games in large populations with anonymity," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 17(1), January.
    15. Guilhem Lecouteux, 2018. "Bayesian game theorists and non-Bayesian players," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(6), pages 1420-1454, November.
    16. Rodrigues-Neto, José Alvaro, 2009. "From posteriors to priors via cycles," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(2), pages 876-883, March.
    17. Chen, Yi-Chun & Lehrer, Ehud & Li, Jiangtao & Samet, Dov & Shmaya, Eran, 2015. "Agreeing to agree and Dutch books," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 108-116.
    18. Heifetz, Aviad, 2006. "The positive foundation of the common prior assumption," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 105-120, July.
    19. Lipman, Barton L., 2010. "Finite order implications of common priors in infinite models," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 56-70, January.
    20. Fiorini, Luciana C. & Rodrigues-Neto, José A., 2017. "Self-consistency, consistency and cycles in non-partitional knowledge models," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 11-21.

    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:mateco:v:49:y:2013:i:6:p:496-500. 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/jmateco .

    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.