IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/expeco/v3y2000i2p153-179.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Elicitation of Strategy Profiles in Large Group Coordination Games

Author

Listed:
  • Darryl Seale
  • Amnon Rapoport

Abstract

The strategy method is an experimental procedure for eliciting a complete strategy of play for all information sets, not only the ones that happen to be reached during the course of a play of a game. We use it to elicit individual strategy profiles for a class of large group, market entry games in which the payoff for a player who enters on a given market capacity value decreases linearly in the difference between the capacity value and the corresponding number of entrants. Our results show that the aggregate frequencies of entry do not differ from previous results obtained under the more common decision method. Under both methods, the number of entrants across a large set of market capacity values is organized remarkably well by the equilibrium solution. In contrast, theindividual profiles do not support mixed equilibrium play; only three of the sixty profiles suggest attempts at randomization or “mixing” between periods. About half of the individual profiles appear to converge, albeit slowly, to cutoff decision policies and more than a quarter of the profiles exhibit a variety of patterns that defy classification. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 2000

Suggested Citation

  • Darryl Seale & Amnon Rapoport, 2000. "Elicitation of Strategy Profiles in Large Group Coordination Games," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 3(2), pages 153-179, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:expeco:v:3:y:2000:i:2:p:153-179
    DOI: 10.1023/A:1026541403088
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1023/A:1026541403088
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1023/A:1026541403088?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 look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mitzkewitz, Michael & Nagel, Rosemarie, 1993. "Experimental Results on Ultimatum Games with Incomplete Information," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 22(2), pages 171-198.
    2. Sundali, James A. & Rapoport, Amnon & Seale, Darryl A., 1995. "Coordination in Market Entry Games with Symmetric Players," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 203-218, November.
    3. Richard J. Gilbert & Marvin Lieberman, 1987. "Investment and Coordination in Oligopolistic Industries," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 18(1), pages 17-33, Spring.
    4. Rapoport, Amnon & Seale, Darryl A. & Winter, Eyal, 2002. "Coordination and Learning Behavior in Large Groups with Asymmetric Players," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 111-136, April.
    5. Linhart, Peter & Radner, Roy & Satterthwaite, Mark, 1989. "Introduction: Symposium on Noncooperative Bargaining," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 1-17, June.
    6. Milchtaich, Igal, 1996. "Congestion Games with Player-Specific Payoff Functions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 111-124, March.
    7. Radner, Roy & Schotter, Andrew, 1989. "The sealed-bid mechanism: An experimental study," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 179-220, June.
    8. Reinhard Selten & Michael Mitzkewitz & Gerald R. Uhlich, 1997. "Duopoly Strategies Programmed by Experienced Players," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(3), pages 517-556, May.
    9. Igal Milchtaich, 1998. "Crowding games are sequentially solvable," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 27(4), pages 501-509.
    10. Amnon Rapoport & Terry Daniel & Darryl Seale, 1998. "Reinforcement-Based Adaptive Learning in Asymmetric Two-Person Bargaining with Incomplete Information," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 1(3), pages 221-253, December.
    11. Linhart, Peter & Radner, Roy & Schotter, Andrew, 1990. "Behavior And Efficiency In The Sealed-Bid Mechanism," Working Papers 90-51, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
    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. Devetag, Giovanna & Warglien, Massimo, 2003. "Games and phone numbers: Do short-term memory bounds affect strategic behavior?," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 189-202, April.
    2. Camerer, Colin F. & Ho, Teck-Hua, 2015. "Behavioral Game Theory Experiments and Modeling," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,, Elsevier.
    3. Rapoport, Amnon & Otsubo, Hironori & Kim, Bora & Stein, William E., 2007. "Unique bid auctions: Equilibrium solutions and experimental evidence," MPRA Paper 4185, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 17 Jul 2007.
    4. Duffy, John & Hopkins, Ed, 2005. "Learning, information, and sorting in market entry games: theory and evidence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 31-62, April.
    5. Linde, Jona & Sonnemans, Joep & Tuinstra, Jan, 2014. "Strategies and evolution in the minority game: A multi-round strategy experiment," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 77-95.
    6. Chen, Daniel L. & Schonger, Martin, 2016. "A Theory of Experiments: Invariance of Equilibrium to the Strategy Method of Elicitation and Implications for Social Preferences," TSE Working Papers 16-724, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE), revised Feb 2020.
    7. Daniel L. Chen & Martin Schonger, 2023. "Invariance of equilibrium to the strategy method I: theory," Post-Print hal-04550734, HAL.
    8. Jordi Brandts & Gary Charness, 2011. "The strategy versus the direct-response method: a first survey of experimental comparisons," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 14(3), pages 375-398, September.
    9. Stein, William E. & Rapoport, Amnon & Seale, Darryl A. & Zhang, Hongtao & Zwick, Rami, 2007. "Batch queues with choice of arrivals: Equilibrium analysis and experimental study," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 59(2), pages 345-363, May.
    10. Vincent Mak & Darryl A. Seale & Eyran J. Gisches & Amnon Rapoport & Meng Cheng & Myounghee Moon & Rui Yang, 2018. "A network ridesharing experiment with sequential choice of transportation mode," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 85(3), pages 407-433, October.
    11. Gunnthorsdottir, Anna & Vragov, Roumen & Mccabe, Kevin, 2007. "The meritocracy as a mechanism to overcome social dilemmas," MPRA Paper 2454, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Tibor Neugebauer, 2005. "Bidding Strategies Of Sequential First Price Auctions Programmed By Experienced Bidders," Experimental 0503007, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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. Colin F. Camerer & Gideon Nave & Alec Smith, 2019. "Dynamic Unstructured Bargaining with Private Information: Theory, Experiment, and Outcome Prediction via Machine Learning," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(4), pages 1867-1890, April.
    2. Jordi Brandts & Gary Charness, 2011. "The strategy versus the direct-response method: a first survey of experimental comparisons," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 14(3), pages 375-398, September.
    3. Rapoport, Amnon & Stein, William E. & Parco, James E. & Seale, Darryl A., 2004. "Equilibrium play in single-server queues with endogenously determined arrival times," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 67-91, September.
    4. Ubeda, Paloma, 2014. "The consistency of fairness rules: An experimental study," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 88-100.
    5. Igal Milchtaich, 2000. "Generic Uniqueness of Equilibrium in Large Crowding Games," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 25(3), pages 349-364, August.
    6. James E. Parco & Amnon Rapoport, 2004. "Enhancing Honesty in Bargaining Under Incomplete Information: An Experimental Study of the Bonus Procedure," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 13(6), pages 539-562, November.
    7. Gabuthy, Yannick & Jacquemet, Nicolas & Marchand, Nadège, 2008. "Does resorting to online dispute resolution promote agreements? Experimental evidence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 259-282, February.
    8. Terry E. Daniel & James E. Parco, 2005. "Fair, Efficient and Envy-Free Bargaining: An Experimental Test of the Brams-Taylor Adjusted Winner Mechanism," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 241-264, May.
    9. Duffy, John & Hopkins, Ed, 2005. "Learning, information, and sorting in market entry games: theory and evidence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 31-62, April.
    10. Jeannette Brosig & Joachim Weimann & Chun-Lei Yang, 2003. "The Hot Versus Cold Effect in a Simple Bargaining Experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 6(1), pages 75-90, June.
    11. Sonnemans, Joep, 2000. "Decisions and strategies in a sequential search experiment," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 91-102, February.
    12. Tomohiro Hayashida & Ichiro Nishizaki & Rika Kambara, 2014. "Simulation Analysis for Network Formulation," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 43(3), pages 371-394, March.
    13. Zultan, Ro’i, 2012. "Strategic and social pre-play communication in the ultimatum game," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 425-434.
    14. Selten, Reinhard, 1998. "Features of experimentally observed bounded rationality," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(3-5), pages 413-436, May.
    15. Tibor Neugebauer, 2005. "Bidding Strategies Of Sequential First Price Auctions Programmed By Experienced Bidders," Experimental 0503007, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Gabuthy, Yannick & Jacquemet, Nicolas & Marchand, Nadège, 2008. "Does resorting to online dispute resolution promote agreements? Experimental evidence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 259-282, February.
    17. Chen, Daniel L. & Schonger, Martin, 2016. "A Theory of Experiments: Invariance of Equilibrium to the Strategy Method of Elicitation and Implications for Social Preferences," TSE Working Papers 16-724, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE), revised Feb 2020.
    18. Igal Milchtaich, 2005. "Topological Conditions for Uniqueness of Equilibrium in Networks," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(1), pages 225-244, February.
    19. Amnon Rapoport & Terry Daniel & Darryl Seale, 1998. "Reinforcement-Based Adaptive Learning in Asymmetric Two-Person Bargaining with Incomplete Information," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 1(3), pages 221-253, December.
    20. Linde, Jona & Gietl, Daniel & Sonnemans, Joep & Tuinstra, Jan, 2023. "The effect of quantity and quality of information in strategy tournaments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 305-323.

    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:kap:expeco:v:3:y:2000:i:2:p:153-179. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.