Nash rationalization of collective choice over lotteries
To test the joint hypothesis that players in a noncooperative game (allowing mixtures over pure strategies) consult an independent preference relation and select a Nash equilibrium, it suffices to study the reaction of the revealed collective choice upon changes in the space of strategies available to the players. The joint hypothesis is supported if the revealed choices satisfy an extended version of Richter's congruence axiom together with a contraction-expansion axiom that models the noncooperative behavior. In addition, we provide sufficient and necessary conditions for a binary relation to have an independent ordering extension, and for individual choices over lotteries to be rationalizable by an independent preference relation.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Clark, Stephen A., 1995. "Indecisive choice theory," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 155-170, October.
- Kim, Taesung, 1996. "Revealed preference theory on the choice of lotteries," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 463-477.
- Ray, Indrajit & Zhou, Lin, 2001.
"Game Theory via Revealed Preferences,"
Games and Economic Behavior,
Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 415-424, November.
- Indrajit Ray & Lin Zhou, "undated". "Game Theory Via Revealed Preferences," Discussion Papers 00/15, Department of Economics, University of York.
- Adam Galambos, 2005. "Revealed Preference in Game Theory," 2005 Meeting Papers 776, Society for Economic Dynamics.
- Conlisk, John, 1989. "Three Variants on the Allais Example," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(3), pages 392-407, June.
- Sprumont, Yves, 2000. "On the Testable Implications of Collective Choice Theories," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 93(2), pages 205-232, August.
- Amartya K. Sen, 1971. "Choice Functions and Revealed Preference," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 38(3), pages 307-317.
- Sopher & Narramore, 2000. "Stochastic Choice and Consistency in Decision Making Under Risk: An Experimental Study," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 48(4), pages 323-349, June.
- Shachat, Jason M., 2002. "Mixed Strategy Play and the Minimax Hypothesis," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 104(1), pages 189-226, May.
- Suzumura, Kataro, 1976. "Remarks on the Theory of Collective Choice," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 43(172), pages 381-390, November.
- Oliver, Adam, 2003. "A quantitative and qualitative test of the Allais paradox using health outcomes," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 35-48, February. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)