IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fth/teavfo/2001-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Nash Equilibrium When Players Account for the Complexity of their Forecasts

Author

Listed:
  • Eliaz, K.

Abstract

Nash equilibrium is often interpreted as a steady state in which each player holds the correct expectations about the other players` behavior and acts rationally. This paper investigates the robustness of this interpretation when players` preferences are affected by their forecasts about the other players. In particular, I analyze the case of lexicographic preferences in which the simplicity of forecasts is secondary to material payoffs.

Suggested Citation

  • Eliaz, K., 2001. "Nash Equilibrium When Players Account for the Complexity of their Forecasts," Papers 2001-6, Tel Aviv.
    • Handle: RePEc:fth:teavfo:2001-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Aumann, Robert J, 1987. "Correlated Equilibrium as an Expression of Bayesian Rationality," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(1), pages 1-18, January.
    2. 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..
    3. Abreu, Dilip & Rubinstein, Ariel, 1988. "The Structure of Nash Equilibrium in Repeated Games with Finite Automata," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 56(6), pages 1259-1281, November.
    4. Rubinstein, Ariel, 1986. "Finite automata play the repeated prisoner's dilemma," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 83-96, June.
    5. Rubinstein, Ariel, 1991. "Comments on the Interpretation of Game Theory," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(4), pages 909-924, July.
    6. Piccione, Michele, 1992. "Finite automata equilibria with discounting," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 180-193, February.
    7. Martin J. Osborne & Ariel Rubinstein, 1994. "A Course in Game Theory," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262650401, December.
    8. Eliaz, K., 2001. "An Equilibrium for Games Played by Imperfect Organizations," Papers 2001-12, Tel Aviv.
    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. Ran Spiegler, 2016. "Bayesian Networks and Boundedly Rational Expectations," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 131(3), pages 1243-1290.
    2. Mengel, Friederike, 2012. "Learning across games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 74(2), pages 601-619.
    3. Spiegler, Ran, 2005. "Testing threats in repeated games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 121(2), pages 214-235, April.
    4. Spiegler, Ran, 2004. "Simplicity of beliefs and delay tactics in a concession game," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 200-220, April.
    5. Tsakas, E., 2012. "Rational belief hierarchies," Research Memorandum 004, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    6. Tsakas, Elias, 2014. "Rational belief hierarchies," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 121-127.
    7. Yilmaz Kocer, 2010. "Endogenous Learning with Bounded Memory," Working Papers 1290, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Econometric Research Program..
    8. Jehiel, Philippe, 2005. "Analogy-based expectation equilibrium," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 123(2), pages 81-104, August.
    9. Azrieli, Yaron, 2009. "Categorizing others in a large game," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 351-362, November.
    10. Diasakos, Theodoros M, 2013. "Complexity and Bounded Rationality in Individual Decision Problemsing," SIRE Discussion Papers 2013-93, Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE).
    11. Theodoros M. Diasakos, 2008. "Complexity and Bounded Rationality in Individual Decision Problems," Carlo Alberto Notebooks 90, Collegio Carlo Alberto.
    12. Azrieli, Yaron, 2007. "Thinking categorically about others: A conjectural equilibrium approach," MPRA Paper 3843, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Maenner, Eliot, 2008. "Adaptation and complexity in repeated games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 166-187, May.

    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. Spiegler, Ran, 2005. "Testing threats in repeated games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 121(2), pages 214-235, April.
    2. Hamid Sabourian & Jihong Lee, 2004. "Complexity and Efficiency in Repeated Games with Negotiation," Econometric Society 2004 Far Eastern Meetings 401, Econometric Society.
    3. Luca Anderlini & Dino Gerardi & Roger Lagunoff, 2004. "The Folk Theorem in Dynastic Repeated Games," Levine's Bibliography 122247000000000577, UCLA Department of Economics.
    4. Jihong Lee & Hamid Sabourian, 2005. "Efficiency in Negotiation: Complexity and Costly Bargaining," Birkbeck Working Papers in Economics and Finance 0505, Birkbeck, Department of Economics, Mathematics & Statistics.
    5. Lee, J. & Sabourian, H., 2004. "Complexity and Efficiency in Repeated Games and Negotiation," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0419, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    6. Burkov, Andriy & Chaib-draa, Brahim, 2015. "Computing equilibria in discounted dynamic games," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 269(C), pages 863-884.
    7. 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.
    8. Jehiel, Philippe, 2005. "Analogy-based expectation equilibrium," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 123(2), pages 81-104, August.
    9. Ho, Teck-Hua, 1996. "Finite automata play repeated prisoner's dilemma with information processing costs," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 20(1-3), pages 173-207.
    10. Hubie Chen, 2013. "Bounded rationality, strategy simplification, and equilibrium," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 42(3), pages 593-611, August.
    11. Douglas Davis & Asen Ivanov & Oleg Korenok, 2014. "Aspects of Behavior in Repeated Games: An Experimental Study," Working Papers 727, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
    12. Luca Anderlini & Leonardo Felli, 1999. "Incomplete Contracts and Complexity Costs," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 23-50, February.
    13. Anderlini, Luca, 1998. "Forecasting errors and bounded rationality: An example," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 71-90, September.
    14. Roman, Mihai Daniel, 2008. "Entreprises behavior in cooperative and punishment‘s repeated negotiations," MPRA Paper 37527, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 05 Jan 2009.
    15. Spiegler, Ran, 2004. "Simplicity of beliefs and delay tactics in a concession game," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 200-220, April.
    16. Asen Ivanov & Douglas D. Davis & Korenok Oleg, 2011. "A Simple Approach for Organizing Behavior and Explaining Cooperation in Repeated Games," Working Papers 1101, VCU School of Business, Department of Economics.
    17. Anderlini, Luca & Sabourian, Hamid, 2001. "Cooperation and computability in n-player games," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 99-137, September.
    18. Yuval Salant & Jörg L. Spenkuch, 2021. "Complexity and Choice," CESifo Working Paper Series 9239, CESifo.
    19. García, Julián & van Veelen, Matthijs, 2016. "In and out of equilibrium I: Evolution of strategies in repeated games with discounting," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 161-189.
    20. Hernández, Penélope & Solan, Eilon, 2016. "Bounded computational capacity equilibrium," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 342-364.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    GAMES ; FORECASTS ; EXPECTATIONS;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O21 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Development Planning and Policy - - - Planning Models; Planning Policy
    • O22 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Development Planning and Policy - - - Project Analysis

    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:fth:teavfo:2001-6. 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: Thomas Krichel (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fotauil.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.