IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2307.14170.html

Power relations in Game Theory

Author

Listed:
  • Daniele De Luca

Abstract

The concept of power among players can be expressed as a combination of their utilities. A player who obeys another takes into account the utility of the dominant one. Technically it is a matter of superimposing some weighted sum or product function onto the individual utility function, where the weights can be represented through directed graphs that reflect a situation of power among the players. It is then possible to define some global indices of the system, such as the level of hierarchy, mutualism and freedom, and measure their effects on game equilibria.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniele De Luca, 2023. "Power relations in Game Theory," Papers 2307.14170, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2307.14170
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2307.14170
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John A. List, 2009. "Social Preferences: Some Thoughts from the Field," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 1(1), pages 563-583, May.
    2. Andreas Flache & Michael Mäs & Thomas Feliciani & Edmund Chattoe-Brown & Guillaume Deffuant & Sylvie Huet & Jan Lorenz, 2017. "Models of Social Influence: Towards the Next Frontiers," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 20(4), pages 1-2.
    3. Pranab Bardhan, 1991. "On The Concept Of Power In Economics," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 3(3), pages 265-277, November.
    4. Boyer, Marcel & Moreaux, Michel, 1986. "Perfect competition as the limit of a hierarchical market game," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 22(2-3), pages 115-118.
    5. Ernst Fehr & Gary Charness, 2025. "Social Preferences: Fundamental Characteristics and Economic Consequences," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 63(2), pages 440-514, June.
    6. repec:cup:apsrev:v:48:y:1954:i:03:p:787-792_00 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Ken Binmore, 2010. "Social norms or social preferences?," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 9(2), pages 139-157, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Daniele De Luca, 2024. "A mathematical theory of power," Papers 2401.16406, arXiv.org.
    2. MITRAILLE Sébastien & MOREAUX Michel, 2007. "Inventories and Endogenous Stackelberg Hierarchy in Two-period Cournot Oligopoly," LERNA Working Papers 07.02.223, LERNA, University of Toulouse.
    3. Isabela Zeberio & Theresa Kuhn & Iñaki Ucar, 2026. "Filtering out Euroskepticism: Media influence and interpersonal communication in an agent-based model of Brexit opinion dynamics," European Union Politics, , vol. 27(2), pages 249-278, June.
    4. Michael T Gastner & Károly Takács & Máté Gulyás & Zsuzsanna Szvetelszky & Beáta Oborny, 2019. "The impact of hypocrisy on opinion formation: A dynamic model," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(6), pages 1-21, June.
    5. Ludovic Julien & Olivier Musy & Aurélien Saïdi, 2011. "Do Followers Really Matter in Stackelberg Competition?," Lecturas de Economía, Universidad de Antioquia, Departamento de Economía, issue 75, pages 11-27.
    6. Abel, Martin & Robbett, Andrea & Stone, Daniel F., 2024. "Partisan Discrimination in Hiring," IZA Discussion Papers 17540, IZA Network @ LISER.
    7. Barmettler, Franziska & Fehr, Ernst & Zehnder, Christian, 2012. "Big experimenter is watching you! Anonymity and prosocial behavior in the laboratory," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 17-34.
    8. Guilhem Lecouteux, 2018. "What does “we” want? Team Reasoning, Game Theory, and Unselfish Behaviours," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 128(3), pages 311-332.
    9. Omar Al-Ubaydli & John List, 2016. "Field Experiments in Markets," Artefactual Field Experiments j0002, The Field Experiments Website.
    10. repec:ehl:lserod:22450 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Rezaei, Sarah & Rosenkranz, Stephanie & Weitzel, Utz & Westbrock, Bastian, 2024. "Social preferences on networks," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
    12. Gómez-Rámirez, Leopoldo & Sánchez, Gonzalo E., 2023. "On the need to anticipate behavioral responses to policies: the case of multiple refilings on taxpayer behavior in Ecuador," MPRA Paper 117825, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Emily Breza & Supreet Kaur & Yogita Shamdasani, 2018. "The Morale Effects of Pay Inequality," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 133(2), pages 611-663.
    14. Mikhail Freer & Daniel Friedman & Christian Ghiglino & Elke Weidenholzer, 2026. "The Joneses Visit an Economics Lab," Papers 2607.07353, arXiv.org.
    15. Matteo M. Galizzi & Daniel Navarro-Martinez, 2019. "On the External Validity of Social Preference Games: A Systematic Lab-Field Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(3), pages 976-1002, March.
    16. Danyang Xie, 2003. "Toward a Theory of Asset Subscription," Finance 0303001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. L. Lambertini & G. Rossini, 2000. "Excess Capacity in Oligopoly with Sequential Entry," Working Papers 384, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    18. Guillaume Deffuant & Ilaria Bertazzi & Sylvie Huet, 2018. "The Dark Side Of Gossips: Hints From A Simple Opinion Dynamics Model," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(06n07), pages 1-20, September.
    19. Topi Miettinen & Olli Ropponen & Pekka Sääskilahti, 2020. "Prospect Theory, Fairness, and the Escalation of Conflict at a Negotiation Impasse," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 122(4), pages 1535-1574, October.
    20. Peter Cappelli & Martin J. Conyon, 2011. "Stock Option Exercise and Gift Exchange Relationships: Evidence for a Large US Company," NBER Working Papers 16814, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    21. Schweitzer, Frank, 2021. "Social percolation revisited: From 2d lattices to adaptive networks," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 570(C).

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2307.14170. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arxiv.org/ .

    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.