IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v42y1996i5p659-679.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Task Complexity, Equilibrium Selection, and Learning: An Experimental Study

Author

Listed:
  • Teck-Hua Ho

    (Anderson Graduate School of Management, University of California, Los Angeles, California 90095)

  • Keith Weigelt

    (The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104)

Abstract

We consider several coordination games with multiple equilibria each of which is a different division of a fixed pie. Laboratory experiments are conducted to address whether "task complexity" affects the selection of equilibrium by subjects. Three measures of task complexity---cardinality of choice space, level of iterative knowledge of rationality, and level of iterative knowledge of strategy---are manipulated and tested. Results suggest the three measures can predict choice behavior. Since strategically equivalent games can have different task complexity measures, our results imply that subjects are sensitive to game form presentation. We also fit data using three adaptive learning models: 1) Cournot, 2) Fictitious Play, and 3) Payoff Reinforcement, in increasing order of required cognitive effort. The Fictitious Play model, which tracks only cumulative frequencies of opponents' past behaviors fits the data best.

Suggested Citation

  • Teck-Hua Ho & Keith Weigelt, 1996. "Task Complexity, Equilibrium Selection, and Learning: An Experimental Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(5), pages 659-679, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:42:y:1996:i:5:p:659-679
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.42.5.659
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.42.5.659
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.42.5.659?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
    ---><---

    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:inm:ormnsc:v:42:y:1996:i:5:p:659-679. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.