IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/jrp/jrpwrp/2010-071.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Minority of Three-Game: An Experimental and Theoretical Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Thorsten Chmura

    (Department of Economics, University of Munich)

  • Werner Güth

    (Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group)

  • Thomas Pitz

    (Nottingham University Business School China)

  • Anthony Ziegelmeyer

    (Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group)

Abstract

We report experimental and theoretical results on the minority of three-game where three players have to choose one of two alternatives independently and the most rewarding alternative is the one chosen by a single player. This coordination game has many asymmetric equilibria in pure strategies that are non strict and payoff-asymmetric, and a unique symmetric mixed strategy equilibrium in which each player's behavior is based on the toss of a fair coin. We show that such a straightforward behavior is predicted by Harsanyi and Selten's (1988) equilibrium selection theory as well as alternative solution concepts like impulse balance equilibrium and sampling equilibrium. Our results indicate that participants rely on various decision rules, and that only a quarter of them decide according to the toss of a fair coin. Reinforcement learning is the most successful decision rule as it describes best the behavior of about a third of our participants.

Suggested Citation

  • Thorsten Chmura & Werner Güth & Thomas Pitz & Anthony Ziegelmeyer, 2010. "The Minority of Three-Game: An Experimental and Theoretical Analysis," Jena Economics Research Papers 2010-071, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
  • Handle: RePEc:jrp:jrpwrp:2010-071
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://oweb.b67.uni-jena.de/Papers/jerp2010/wp_2010_071.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sethi, Rajiv, 2000. "Stability of Equilibria in Games with Procedurally Rational Players," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 85-104, July.
    2. John C. Harsanyi & Reinhard Selten, 1988. "A General Theory of Equilibrium Selection in Games," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262582384, December.
    3. Fudenberg, Drew & Levine, David, 1998. "Learning in games," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(3-5), pages 631-639, May.
    4. Colin Camerer & Teck-Hua Ho, 1999. "Experience-weighted Attraction Learning in Normal Form Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 67(4), pages 827-874, July.
    5. Urs Fischbacher, 2007. "z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(2), pages 171-178, June.
    6. Cheung, Yin-Wong & Friedman, Daniel, 1997. "Individual Learning in Normal Form Games: Some Laboratory Results," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 46-76, April.
    7. Ho, Teck H. & Camerer, Colin F. & Chong, Juin-Kuan, 2007. "Self-tuning experience weighted attraction learning in games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 133(1), pages 177-198, March.
    8. Dennis A. V. Dittrich & Werner Güth & Martin G. Kocher & Paul Pezanis‐Christou, 2012. "Loss Aversion and Learning to Bid," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 79(314), pages 226-257, April.
    9. Duffy, John & Hopkins, Ed, 2005. "Learning, information, and sorting in market entry games: theory and evidence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 31-62, April.
    10. Erev, Ido & Roth, Alvin E, 1998. "Predicting How People Play Games: Reinforcement Learning in Experimental Games with Unique, Mixed Strategy Equilibria," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(4), pages 848-881, September.
    11. Sebastian Goerg & Reinhard Selten, 2009. "Experimental investigation of stationary concepts in cyclic duopoly games," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 12(3), pages 253-271, September.
    12. Osborne, Martin J & Rubinstein, Ariel, 1998. "Games with Procedurally Rational Players," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(4), pages 834-847, September.
    13. Chmura, T. & Pitz, T., 2006. "Successful strategies in repeated minority games," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 363(2), pages 477-480.
    14. Selten, R. & Chmura, T. & Pitz, T. & Kube, S. & Schreckenberg, M., 2007. "Commuters route choice behaviour," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 394-406, February.
    15. Reinhard Selten & Thorsten Chmura & Sebastian J. Goerg, 2011. "Stationary Concepts for Experimental 2 X 2 Games: Reply," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(2), pages 1041-1044, April.
    16. Reinhard Selten & Thorsten Chmura, 2008. "Stationary Concepts for Experimental 2x2-Games," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(3), pages 938-966, June.
    17. Drew Fudenberg & David K. Levine, 1998. "The Theory of Learning in Games," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262061945, December.
    18. Giulio Bottazzi & Giovanna Devetag, 2007. "Competition and coordination in experimental minority games," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 241-275, June.
    19. Greiner, Ben, 2004. "An Online Recruitment System for Economic Experiments," MPRA Paper 13513, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    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. Giovanna Devetag & Francesca Pancotto & Thomas Brenner, 2011. "The Minority Game Unpacked: Coordination and Competition in a Team-based Experiment," LEM Papers Series 2011/18, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    2. Sandholm, William H. & Izquierdo, Segismundo S. & Izquierdo, Luis R., 2020. "Stability for best experienced payoff dynamics," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    3. Yamada, Takashi & Hanaki, Nobuyuki, 2016. "An experiment on Lowest Unique Integer Games," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 463(C), pages 88-102.
    4. Izquierdo, Segismundo S. & Izquierdo, Luis R., 2023. "Strategy sets closed under payoff sampling," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 126-142.
    5. Arigapudi, Srinivas & Heller, Yuval & Milchtaich, Igal, 2020. "Instability of Defection in the Prisoner’s Dilemma: Best Experienced Payoff Dynamics Analysis," MPRA Paper 99594, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Arigapudi, Srinivas & Heller, Yuval & Milchtaich, Igal, 2021. "Instability of defection in the prisoner's dilemma under best experienced payoff dynamics," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    7. Giovanna Devetag & Francesca Pancotto & Thomas Brenner, 2014. "The minority game unpacked:," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 761-797, September.
    8. Sethi, Rajiv, 2021. "Stable sampling in repeated games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    9. Linde, Jona & Sonnemans, Joep & Tuinstra, Jan, 2014. "Strategies and evolution in the minority game: A multi-round strategy experiment," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 77-95.
    10. Izquierdo, Segismundo S. & Izquierdo, Luis R., 2022. "Stability of strict equilibria in best experienced payoff dynamics: Simple formulas and applications," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    11. Christopher K. Hsee & Ying Zeng & Xilin Li & Alex Imas, 2021. "Bounded Rationality in Strategic Decisions: Undershooting in a Resource Pool-Choice Dilemma," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(10), pages 6553-6567, October.
    12. Nadir Altinok & Abdurrahman Aydemir, 2015. "The Unfolding of Gender Gap in Education," Working Papers 934, Economic Research Forum, revised Aug 2015.
    13. Srinivas Arigapudi & Yuval Heller & Igal Milchtaich, 2020. "Instability of Defection in the Prisoner's Dilemma Under Best Experienced Payoff Dynamics," Papers 2005.05779, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2021.
    14. Rapoport, Amnon & Gisches, Eyran J. & Daniel, Terry & Lindsey, Robin, 2014. "Pre-trip information and route-choice decisions with stochastic travel conditions: Experiment," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 154-172.

    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. Kets, W., 2008. "Networks and learning in game theory," Other publications TiSEM 7713fce1-3131-498c-8c6f-3, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    2. Willemien Kets, 2007. "The minority game: An economics perspective," Papers 0706.4432, arXiv.org.
    3. Chmura, Thorsten & Goerg, Sebastian J. & Selten, Reinhard, 2012. "Learning in experimental 2×2 games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 44-73.
    4. Erhao Xie, 2019. "Monetary Payoff and Utility Function in Adaptive Learning Models," Staff Working Papers 19-50, Bank of Canada.
    5. Andreas Nicklisch, 2011. "Learning strategic environments: an experimental study of strategy formation and transfer," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 71(4), pages 539-558, October.
    6. Rick, Scott & Weber, Roberto A., 2010. "Meaningful learning and transfer of learning in games played repeatedly without feedback," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 68(2), pages 716-730, March.
    7. Sebastian J. Goerg & Tibor Neugebauer & Abdolkarim Sadrieh, 2016. "Impulse Response Dynamics in Weakest Link Games," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 17(3), pages 284-297, August.
    8. Jim Engle-Warnick & Ed Hopkins, 2006. "A Simple Test of Learning Theory," Levine's Bibliography 321307000000000724, UCLA Department of Economics.
    9. Shafran, Aric P., 2012. "Learning in games with risky payoffs," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 354-371.
    10. Wen, Yuanji, 2018. "Voluntary information acquisition in an asymmetric-Information game:comparing learning theories in the laboratory," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 202-219.
    11. Heggedal, Tom-Reiel & Helland, Leif, 2014. "Platform selection in the lab," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 168-177.
    12. Cason, Timothy N. & Friedman, Daniel & Hopkins, Ed, 2010. "Testing the TASP: An experimental investigation of learning in games with unstable equilibria," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(6), pages 2309-2331, November.
    13. Ed Hopkins, 2002. "Two Competing Models of How People Learn in Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(6), pages 2141-2166, November.
    14. Xie, Erhao, 2021. "Empirical properties and identification of adaptive learning models in behavioral game theory," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 798-821.
    15. Hofbauer, Josef & Hopkins, Ed, 2005. "Learning in perturbed asymmetric games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 133-152, July.
    16. Zhang, Yang & Du, Xiaomin, 2017. "Network effects on strategic interactions: A laboratory approach," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 133-146.
    17. Claudia Neri, 2015. "Eliciting beliefs in continuous-choice games: a double auction experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(4), pages 569-608, December.
    18. Wolf Ze'ev Ehrblatt & Kyle Hyndman & Erkut Y. ÄOzbay & Andrew Schotter, 2006. "Convergence: An Experimental Study," Levine's Working Paper Archive 122247000000001148, David K. Levine.
    19. Siegfried K. Berninghaus & Thomas Neumann & Bodo Vogt, 2014. "Learning in Networks—An Experimental Study Using Stationary Concepts," Games, MDPI, vol. 5(3), pages 1-20, July.
    20. Todd Guilfoos & Andreas Duus Pape, 2020. "Estimating Case-Based Learning," Games, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-25, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Coordination; Minority game; Mixed strategy; Learning models; Experiments;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness

    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:jrp:jrpwrp:2010-071. 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: Markus Pasche (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.jenecon.de .

    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.