IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/edn/esedps/91.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Ratio Orderings and Comparative Statics

Author

Abstract

Monotone ratio orderings are refinements of first order stochastic dominance that allow monotone comparative statics results in games of incomplete information. We develop analogous refinements for second order stochastic dominance based on the monotonicity of the cumulative probability ratio and the unimodality of the likelihood and probability ratios. We go on to investigate comparative statics in first price auctions, both private and common value, of the effects of more precise information in the sense of the new orderings. We find that almost all types bid more aggressively under the new distribution than they did under the old, but the highest types may bid less. This leads to higher expected revenue in a simple common value auction, but to an ambiguous result in the private value case.

Suggested Citation

  • Ed Hopkins & Tatiana Kornienko, 2003. "Ratio Orderings and Comparative Statics," Edinburgh School of Economics Discussion Paper Series 91, Edinburgh School of Economics, University of Edinburgh.
  • Handle: RePEc:edn:esedps:91
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econ.ed.ac.uk/papers/id91_esedps.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jacob K. Goeree & Theo Offerman, 2003. "Competitive Bidding in Auctions with Private and Common Values," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 113(489), pages 598-613, July.
    2. Eeckhoudt, Louis & Gollier, Christian, 1995. "Demand for Risky Assets and the Monotone Probability Ratio Order," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 113-122, September.
    3. Simmons, P., 1996. "Seller surplus in first price auctions," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 1-5, January.
    4. Paul Klemperer, 1999. "Auction Theory: A Guide to the Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(3), pages 227-286, July.
    5. Shorrocks, Anthony F, 1983. "Ranking Income Distributions," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 50(197), pages 3-17, February.
    6. Milgrom, Paul R & Weber, Robert J, 1982. "A Theory of Auctions and Competitive Bidding," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(5), pages 1089-1122, September.
    7. Kagel, John H. & Levin, Dan, 1986. "The Winner's Curse and Public Information in Common Value Auctions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 894-920, December.
    8. Krishna, Vijay, 2009. "Auction Theory," Elsevier Monographs, Elsevier, edition 2, number 9780123745071.
    9. An, Mark Yuying, 1998. "Logconcavity versus Logconvexity: A Complete Characterization," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 80(2), pages 350-369, June.
    10. Ramos, Hector M. & Ollero, Jorge & Sordo, Miguel A., 2000. "A Sufficient Condition for Generalized Lorenz Order," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 90(2), pages 286-292, February.
    11. Milgrom, Paul, 1989. "Auctions and Bidding: A Primer," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 3(3), pages 3-22, Summer.
    12. Lebrun, Bernard, 1998. "Comparative Statics in First Price Auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 97-110, October.
    13. Susan Athey, 2002. "Monotone Comparative Statics under Uncertainty," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 117(1), pages 187-223.
    14. Klemperer, Paul, 1999. " Auction Theory: A Guide to the Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(3), pages 227-86, July.
    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. Ed Hopkins & Tatiana Kornienko, 2004. "Running to Keep in the Same Place: Consumer Choice as a Game of Status," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(4), pages 1085-1107, September.
    2. Christopher Li, 2021. "Indirect accountability of political appointees," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 33(3), pages 383-396, July.
    3. Dubey, Pradeep & Geanakoplos, John, 2010. "Grading exams: 100,99,98,... or A,B,C?," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 72-94, May.
    4. Jon Kleinberg & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2019. "Simplicity Creates Inequity: Implications for Fairness, Stereotypes, and Interpretability," NBER Working Papers 25854, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Anastasios Papanastasiou, 2017. "Moral Hazard and Horizontal Information," Department of Economics Working Papers 2017-10, McMaster University.
    6. Pradeep Dubey & John Geanakoplos, 2014. "Games with Money and Status: How Best to Incentivize Work," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1954, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    7. Pradeep Dubey & John Geanakoplos, 2005. "Grading in Games of Status: Marking Exams and Setting Wages," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1544, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University, revised Dec 2005.

    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. Ed Hopkins & Tatiana Kornienko, 2004. "Non-Monotone Comparative Statics in Games of Incomplete Information," Edinburgh School of Economics Discussion Paper Series 122, Edinburgh School of Economics, University of Edinburgh.
    2. Ed Hopkins & Tatiana Kornienko, 2007. "Cross and Double Cross: Comparative Statics in First Price Auctions," Levine's Bibliography 321307000000000831, UCLA Department of Economics.
    3. Jacob K. Goeree & Theo Offerman, 2003. "Competitive Bidding in Auctions with Private and Common Values," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 113(489), pages 598-613, July.
    4. Elbittar, Alexander, 2009. "Impact of valuation ranking information on bidding in first-price auctions: A laboratory study," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 75-85, January.
    5. A. Alexander Elbittar, 2005. "Impact of Valuation Ranking Information on Bidding in First-Price," Microeconomics 0508008, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Benoit, Jean-Pierre & Dubra, Juan, 2006. "Information revelation in auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 181-205, November.
    7. Tan, Xu, 2016. "Information revelation in auctions with common and private values," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 147-165.
    8. Maréchal, François & Morand, Pierre-Henri, 2011. "First-price sealed-bid auctions when bidders exhibit different attitudes toward risk," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 113(2), pages 108-111.
    9. Erik Eyster & Matthew Rabin, 2005. "Cursed Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 73(5), pages 1623-1672, September.
    10. Mezzetti, Claudio & Pekec, Aleksandar Sasa & Tsetlin, Ilia, 2008. "Sequential vs. single-round uniform-price auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 591-609, March.
    11. Parlour, Christine A. & Prasnikar, Vesna & Rajan, Uday, 2007. "Compensating for the winner's curse: Experimental evidence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 339-356, August.
    12. Axel Ockenfels & David Reiley & Abdolkarim Sadrieh, 2006. "Online Auctions," NBER Working Papers 12785, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Miravete, Eugenio J., 2011. "Convolution and composition of totally positive random variables in economics," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(4-5), pages 479-490.
    14. Arnaud Costinot, 2009. "An Elementary Theory of Comparative Advantage," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 77(4), pages 1165-1192, July.
    15. Chu, Sing-Fat & Koh, Winston T. H. & Tse, Yiu Kuen, 2004. "Expectations formation and forecasting of vehicle demand: an empirical study of the vehicle quota auctions in Singapore," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 367-381, June.
    16. Emiel Maasland & Sander Onderstal, 2006. "Going, Going, Gone! A Swift Tour of Auction Theory and its Applications," De Economist, Springer, vol. 154(2), pages 197-249, June.
    17. François Maréchal & Pierre-Henri Morand, 2012. "The public release of information in first-price sealed-bid auctions," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 16(4), pages 323-330, December.
    18. E Ballestero & C Bielza & D Pla-Santamaría, 2006. "A decision approach to competitive electronic sealed-bid auctions for land," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(9), pages 1126-1133, September.
    19. Pickl, Matthias & Wirl, Franz, 2011. "Auction design for gas pipeline transportation capacity--The case of Nabucco and its open season," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 2143-2151, April.
    20. Kashyap, Ravi, 2018. "Auction theory adaptations for real life applications," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(4), pages 452-481.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    monotone likelihood ratio; monotone probability ratio; conditional stochastic dominance; generalized Lorenz order; comparative statics; first price auctions; common value auctions;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • D31 - Microeconomics - - Distribution - - - Personal Income and Wealth Distribution
    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty

    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:edn:esedps:91. 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: Research Office (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deediuk.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.