Sequential Two-Player Games With Ambiguity
If players' beliefs are strictly nonadditive, the Dempster-Shafer updating rule can be used to define beliefs off the equilibrium path. We define an equilibrium concept in sequential two-person games where players update their beliefs with the Dempster-Shafer updating rule. We show that in the limit as uncertainty tends to zero, our equilibrium approximates Bayesian Nash equilibrium. We argue that our equilibrium can be used to define a refinement of Bayesian Nash equilibrium by imposing context-dependent constraints on beliefs under uncertainty. Copyright 2004 by the Economics Department Of The University Of Pennsylvania And Osaka University Institute Of Social And Economic Research Association.
Volume (Year): 45 (2004)
Issue (Month): 4 (November)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: 160 McNeil Building, 3718 Locust Walk, Philadelphia, PA 19104-6297|
Phone: (215) 898-8487
Fax: (215) 573-2057
Web page: http://www.econ.upenn.edu/ier
More information through EDIRC
|Order Information:|| Web: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/subs.asp?ref=0020-6598 Email: |
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.:
- Kin Chung Lo, 1995.
"Equilibrium in Beliefs Under Uncertainty,"
ecpap-95-02, University of Toronto, Department of Economics.
- Brandts, Jordi & Holt, Charles A, 1992. "An Experimental Test of Equilibrium Dominance in Signaling Games," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(5), pages 1350-65, December.
- Eichberger, Jurgen & Kelsey, David, 1996.
"Uncertainty Aversion and Preference for Randomisation,"
Journal of Economic Theory,
Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 31-43, October.
- Eichberger, J. & Kelsey, D., 1995. "Uncertainty Aversion and Preferences for Randomisation," Department of Economics - Working Papers Series 476, The University of Melbourne.
- Dow James & Werlang Sergio Ribeiro Da Costa, 1994.
"Nash Equilibrium under Knightian Uncertainty: Breaking Down Backward Induction,"
Journal of Economic Theory,
Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 305-324, December.
- Dow, James & Werlang, Sérgio Ribeiro da Costa, 1992. "Nash equilibrium under knightian uncertainty: breaking-down backward induction," Economics Working Papers (Ensaios Economicos da EPGE) 186, FGV/EPGE Escola Brasileira de Economia e Finanças, Getulio Vargas Foundation (Brazil).
- Itzhak Gilboa & David Schmeidler, 1991.
"Updating Ambiguous Beliefs,"
924, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- Bebchuk, Lucian Arye, 1988.
"Suing Solely to Extract a Settlement Offer,"
The Journal of Legal Studies,
University of Chicago Press, vol. 17(2), pages 437-50, June.
- Camerer, Colin & Weber, Martin, 1992. "Recent Developments in Modeling Preferences: Uncertainty and Ambiguity," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 325-70, October.
- Ryan, Matthew J., 2002. "Violations of Belief Persistence in Dempster-Shafer Equilibrium," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 167-174, April.
- David Schmeidler, 1989.
"Subjective Probability and Expected Utility without Additivity,"
Levine's Working Paper Archive
7662, David K. Levine.
- Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Subjective Probability and Expected Utility without Additivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 571-87, May.
- Lo, Kin Chung, 1999.
"Extensive Form Games with Uncertainty Averse Players,"
Games and Economic Behavior,
Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 256-270, August.
- Kin Chung Lo, 1995. "Extensive Form Games with Uncertainty Averse Players," Working Papers ecpap-95-03, University of Toronto, Department of Economics.
- Nehring, Klaus, 1994. "On the Interpretation of Sarin and Wakker's "A Simple Axiomatization of Nonadditive Expected Utility."," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(4), pages 935-38, July.
- Marinacci, Massimo, 2000. "Ambiguous Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 191-219, May.
- Jürgen Eichberger & David Kelsey, 1999.
"E-Capacities and the Ellsberg Paradox,"
Theory and Decision,
Springer, vol. 46(2), pages 107-138, April.
- Eichberger, Jurgen & Kelsey, David, 2002. "Strategic Complements, Substitutes, and Ambiguity: The Implications for Public Goods," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 106(2), pages 436-466, October.
- Banks, Jeffrey & Camerer, Colin & Porter, David., 1990.
"An Experimental Analysis of Nash Refinements in Signaling Games,"
740, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
- Banks Jeffrey & Camerer Colin & Porter David, 1994. "An Experimental Analysis of Nash Refinements in Signaling Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 1-31, January.
- Sarin, Rakesh K & Wakker, Peter, 1992. "A Simple Axiomatization of Nonadditive Expected Utility," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(6), pages 1255-72, November.
- Michael Spence, 1973. "Job Market Signaling," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 87(3), pages 355-374.
- Eichberger, Jurgen & Kelsey, David, 2000. "Non-Additive Beliefs and Strategic Equilibria," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 183-215, February.
- Brandts, Jordi & Holt, Charles A, 1993. "Adjustment Patterns and Equilibrium Selection in Experimental Signaling Games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 22(3), pages 279-302.
- Itzhak Gilboa, 1989. "Duality in Non-Additive Expected Utility Theory," Post-Print hal-00753238, HAL.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ier:iecrev:v:45:y:2004:i:4:p:1229-1261. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing)or ()
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.