IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2508.06425.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Strategy Method Effects in Centipede Games: An Optimal Design Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Shiang-Hung Hu
  • Po-Hsuan Lin
  • Thomas R. Palfrey
  • Joseph Tao-yi Wang
  • Yu-Hsiang Wang

Abstract

We explore the twin questions of when and why the strategy method creates behavioral distortions in the elicitation of choices in laboratory studies of sequential games. While such distortions have been widely documented, the theoretical forces driving these distortions remain poorly understood. In this paper, we compare behavior in six optimally designed centipede games, implemented under three different choice elicitation methods: the direct response method, the reduced strategy method and the full strategy method. These methods elicit behavioral strategies, reduced strategies, and complete strategies, respectively. We find significant behavioral differences across these elicitation methods -- differences that cannot be explained by standard game theory, but are consistent with the predictions of the Dynamic Cognitive Hierarchy solution (Lin and Palfrey, 2024), combined with quantal responses.

Suggested Citation

  • Shiang-Hung Hu & Po-Hsuan Lin & Thomas R. Palfrey & Joseph Tao-yi Wang & Yu-Hsiang Wang, 2025. "Strategy Method Effects in Centipede Games: An Optimal Design Approach," Papers 2508.06425, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2508.06425
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2508.06425
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    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:2508.06425. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://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.