IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/restud/v89y2022i2p948-975..html

Rationalizability, Observability, and Common Knowledge

Author

Listed:
  • Antonio Penta
  • Peio Zuazo-Garin

Abstract

We study the strategic impact of players’ higher-order uncertainty over the observability of actions in general two-player games. More specifically, we consider the space of all belief hierarchies generated by the uncertainty over whether the game will be played as a static game or with perfect information. Over this space, we characterize the correspondence of a solution concept which captures the behavioural implications of Rationality and Common Belief in Rationality (RCBR), where “rationality” is understood as sequential whenever the game is dynamic. We show that such a correspondence is generically single-valued, and that its structure supports a robust refinement of rationalizability, which often has very sharp implications. For instance, (1) in a class of games which includes both zero-sum games with a pure equilibrium and coordination games with a unique efficient equilibrium, RCBR generically ensures efficient equilibrium outcomes (eductive coordination); (2) in a class of games which also includes other well-known families of coordination games, RCBR generically selects components of the Stackelberg profiles (Stackelberg selection); (3) if it is commonly known that player ’s action is not observable (e.g. becauseis commonly known to move earlier, etc.), in a class of games which includes all of the above RCBR generically selects the equilibrium of the static game most favourable to player(pervasiveness of first-mover advantage).

Suggested Citation

  • Antonio Penta & Peio Zuazo-Garin, 2022. "Rationalizability, Observability, and Common Knowledge," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 89(2), pages 948-975.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:restud:v:89:y:2022:i:2:p:948-975.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/restud/rdab047
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Battigalli, Pierpaolo & Leonetti, Paolo & Maccheroni, Fabio, 2020. "Behavioral equivalence of extensive game structures," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 533-547.
    2. Lee, Natalie, 2023. "Feigning ignorance for long-term gains," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 42-71.
    3. Kets, Willemien & Kager, Wouter & Sandroni, Alvaro, 2022. "The value of a coordination game," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    4. Evan Piermont & Peio Zuazo-Garin, 2021. "Heterogeneously Perceived Incentives in Dynamic Environments: Rationalization, Robustness and Unique Selections," Papers 2105.06772, arXiv.org.
    5. Jann, Ole & Schottmüller, Christoph, 2021. "Regime change games with an active defender," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 96-113.
    6. Berlin, Noémi & Gueye, Mamadou & Monjon, Stéphanie, 2025. "Feedback and cooperation: An Experiment in sorting behavior," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 230(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C70 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - General
    • C71 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Cooperative Games
    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:oup:restud:v:89:y:2022:i:2:p:948-975.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/restud .

    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.