IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ecl/stabus/1877.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Empirical Content of Adaptive Models

Author

Listed:
  • Bendor, Jonatahn

    (Stanford U)

  • Diermeier, Daniel

    (Northwestern U)

  • Ting, Michael M.

    (Columbia U)

Abstract

Models with adaptive agents have become increasingly popular in computational sociology (e.g. Macy 1991, Macy and Flache 2002). In this paper we show that at least two important kinds of such models lack empirical content. In the first type players adjust via reinforcement learning: they adjust their propensities to undertake actions based on the kind of feedback they receive. In the second type players satisfice--i.e., retain the same action if the payoff is satisfactory--and search when payoffs are unsatisfactory. In both types of models feed-back is coded as satisfactory if it exceeds some aspiration level, where aspirations may themselves adjust to reflect prior payoffs. We show that outcomes in either type of model are highly sensitive to initial parameters; that is, any outcome of the stage game can be supported as a stable outcome. Intuitively, this occurs because players may be endowed with initial aspirations that make any outcome satisfactory, and thus the actions producing that outcome can be reinforced by all players. These results hold even when players' aspirations are endogenous. We also present two solutions to this problem. First, we show that stochastic versions of the model ensure ergodicity: i.e., the players' action-propensities and aspirations converge to a unique limiting distribution that is independent of their initial values. Second, we show that if players engage in social comparisons--specifically, an agent's aspiration depends on the payoffs of his peers, in addition to his own--then far fewer outcomes can be sustained in equilibrium.

Suggested Citation

  • Bendor, Jonatahn & Diermeier, Daniel & Ting, Michael M., 2002. "The Empirical Content of Adaptive Models," Research Papers 1877, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
  • Handle: RePEc:ecl:stabus:1877
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://gsbapps.stanford.edu/researchpapers/library/RP1877.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Herbert A. Simon, 1955. "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 69(1), pages 99-118.
    2. Palfrey, Thomas R. & Rosenthal, Howard, 1984. "Participation and the provision of discrete public goods: a strategic analysis," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 171-193, July.
    3. Michael W. Macy, 1989. "Walking out of Social Traps," Rationality and Society, , vol. 1(2), pages 197-219, October.
    4. Sidney G. Winter, 1971. "Satisficing, Selection, and the Innovating Remnant," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 85(2), pages 237-261.
    5. Bendor, Jonathan & Diermeier, Daniel & Ting, Michael M., 2000. "A Behavioral Model of Turnout," Research Papers 1627, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    6. Drew Fudenberg & Eric Maskin, 2008. "The Folk Theorem In Repeated Games With Discounting Or With Incomplete Information," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Drew Fudenberg & David K Levine (ed.), A Long-Run Collaboration On Long-Run Games, chapter 11, pages 209-230, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    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. Cui Zhiwei & Zhai Jian & Liu Xuan, 2009. "The Efficiency of Observability and Mutual Linkage," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 1-36, July.

    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. van Damme, E.E.C., 1995. "Game theory : The next stage," Other publications TiSEM 7779b0f9-bef5-45c7-ae6b-7, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    2. Pascal Seppecher & Isabelle Salle & Dany Lang, 2019. "Is the market really a good teacher?," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 299-335, March.
    3. Sidney G. Winter, 2017. "Pursuing the evolutionary agenda in economics and management research," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 41(3), pages 721-747.
    4. Pavel Pelikán, 2010. "The Government Economic Agenda in a Society of Unequally Rational Individuals," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(2), pages 231-255, May.
    5. Christian Lukas & Jens Robert Schöndube, 2008. "Trust and Adaptive Learning in Implicit Contracts," FEMM Working Papers 08017, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management.
    6. de Vries, F.P., 1999. "The Behavioral Firm and Its Internal Game : Evolutionary Dynamics of Decision Making," Other publications TiSEM 81ac857a-7637-49d8-a52e-3, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    7. Miller, John H., 1996. "The coevolution of automata in the repeated Prisoner's Dilemma," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 87-112, January.
    8. Elinor Ostrom, 2010. "Analyzing collective action," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 41(s1), pages 155-166, November.
    9. Kjell Hausken, 1997. "Game-theoretic and Behavioral Negotiation Theory," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 6(6), pages 511-528, December.
    10. Sebastian Garmann, 2020. "Political efficacy and the persistence of turnout shocks," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(3), pages 411-429, November.
    11. Kapás, Judit, 1999. "Szükséges-e többdimenziós vállalatelmélet?. Az evolúciós vállalatelmélet kritikai összefoglalása [Is a multi-dimensional theory of the firm necessary?. A critical summary of the evolutionary theory," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(9), pages 823-841.
    12. Ken Binmore & Larry Samuelson, 2010. "Muddling Through: Noisy Equilibrium Selection," Levine's Working Paper Archive 426, David K. Levine.
    13. Larry Karp & Hiroaki Sakamoto, 2018. "International environmental agreements without commitment," 2018 Meeting Papers 508, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    14. Mie Augier & David J. Teece, 2009. "Dynamic Capabilities and the Role of Managers in Business Strategy and Economic Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 410-421, April.
    15. Aumann, Robert J., 1997. "Rationality and Bounded Rationality," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 21(1-2), pages 2-14, October.
    16. Binmore, Ken & Samuelson, Larry, 1997. "Muddling Through: Noisy Equilibrium Selection," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 74(2), pages 235-265, June.
    17. Ruttan, Vernon W., 1996. "Sources Of Technical Change: Induced Innovation, Evolutionary Theory And Path Dependence," Bulletins 12974, University of Minnesota, Economic Development Center.
    18. Cattaneo, Andrea & Robinson, Sherman, 2000. "Empirical models, rules, and optimization," TMD discussion papers 53, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    19. Bleda, Mercedes & Shackley, Simon, 2008. "The dynamics of belief in climate change and its risks in business organisations," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2-3), pages 517-532, June.
    20. Duffy, John, 2006. "Agent-Based Models and Human Subject Experiments," Handbook of Computational Economics, in: Leigh Tesfatsion & Kenneth L. Judd (ed.), Handbook of Computational Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 19, pages 949-1011, Elsevier.

    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:ecl:stabus:1877. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gsstaus.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.