IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/kan/wpaper/201240.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Games with Strategic Heterogeneity

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew Monaco

    (Department of Economics, Colgate University)

  • Tarun Sabarwal

    (Department of Economics, University of Kansas)

Abstract

This paper studies games with both strategic substitutes and strategic complements, and more generally, games with strategic heterogeneity (GSH). Such games may behave differ- ently from either games with strategic complements or games with strategic substitutes. Under mild assumptions (on one or two players only), the equilibrium set in a GSH is totally unordered (no two equilibria are comparable in the standard product order). Moreover, under mild assumptions (on one player only), parameterized GSH do not allow decreasing equilibrium selections. In general, this cannot be strengthened to conclude in- creasing selections. Monotone comparative statics results are presented for games in which some players exhibit strategic substitutes and others exhibit strategic complements. For two-player games with linearly ordered strategy spaces, there is a characterization. More generally, there are sufficient conditions. The conditions apply only to players exhibiting strategic substitutes; no conditions are needed for players with strategic complements. Several examples highlight the results.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew Monaco & Tarun Sabarwal, 2012. "Games with Strategic Heterogeneity," WORKING PAPERS SERIES IN THEORETICAL AND APPLIED ECONOMICS 201240, University of Kansas, Department of Economics, revised Nov 2012.
  • Handle: RePEc:kan:wpaper:201240
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www2.ku.edu/~kuwpaper/2009Papers/201240.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gary S. Becker, 1974. "Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach," NBER Chapters, in: Essays in the Economics of Crime and Punishment, pages 1-54, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Federico Echenique, 2002. "Comparative Statics by Adaptive Dynamics and the Correspondence Principle," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(2), pages 833-844, March.
    3. John K.-H. Quah & Bruno Strulovici, 2009. "Comparative Statics, Informativeness, and the Interval Dominance Order," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 77(6), pages 1949-1992, November.
    4. Alexander Zimper, 2007. "A fixed point characterization of the dominance-solvability of lattice games with strategic substitutes," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 36(1), pages 107-117, September.
    5. Zhou Lin, 1994. "The Set of Nash Equilibria of a Supermodular Game Is a Complete Lattice," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 295-300, September.
    6. Shannon, Chris, 1995. "Weak and Strong Monotone Comparative Statics," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 5(2), pages 209-227, March.
    7. Edlin, Aaron S. & Shannon, Chris, 1998. "Strict Monotonicity in Comparative Statics," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 201-219, July.
    8. John K.-H Quah, 2007. "The Comparative Statics of Constrained Optimization Problems," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 75(2), pages 401-431, March.
    9. Bulow, Jeremy I & Geanakoplos, John D & Klemperer, Paul D, 1985. "Multimarket Oligopoly: Strategic Substitutes and Complements," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 93(3), pages 488-511, June.
    10. Sunanda Roy & Tarun Sabarwal, 2008. "On the (non-)lattice structure of the equilibrium set in games with strategic substitutes," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 37(1), pages 161-169, October.
    11. Tombak, Mihkel M., 2006. "Strategic asymmetry," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 61(3), pages 339-350, November.
    12. Acemoglu, Daron & Jensen, Martin Kaae, 2013. "Aggregate comparative statics," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 27-49.
    13. Villas-Boas, J. Miguel, 1997. "Comparative Statics of Fixed Points," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 183-198, March.
    14. Amir, Rabah & Garcia, Filomena & Knauff, Malgorzata, 2010. "Symmetry-breaking in two-player games via strategic substitutes and diagonal nonconcavity: A synthesis," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(5), pages 1968-1986, September.
    15. Vives, Xavier, 1990. "Nash equilibrium with strategic complementarities," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 305-321.
    16. Amir, Rabah, 1996. "Cournot Oligopoly and the Theory of Supermodular Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 132-148, August.
    17. Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John, 1990. "Rationalizability, Learning, and Equilibrium in Games with Strategic Complementarities," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 58(6), pages 1255-1277, November.
    18. Dixit, Avinash K, 1987. "Strategic Behavior in Contests," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(5), pages 891-898, December.
    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. Hoffmann, Eric J. & Sabarwal, Tarun, 2015. "A global game with strategic substitutes and complements: Comment," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 188-190.

    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. Andrew J. Monaco & Tarun Sabarwal, 2016. "Games with strategic complements and substitutes," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 62(1), pages 65-91, June.
    2. Roy, Sunanda & Sabarwal, Tarun, 2012. "Characterizing stability properties in games with strategic substitutes," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 337-353.
    3. Roy, Sunanda & Sabarwal, Tarun, 2010. "Monotone comparative statics for games with strategic substitutes," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(5), pages 793-806, September.
    4. Anne-Christine Barthel & Tarun Sabarwal, 2018. "Directional monotone comparative statics," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 66(3), pages 557-591, October.
    5. Andrew Monaco & Tarun Sabarwal, 2012. "Monotone Comparative Statics in Games with both Strategic Complements and Strategic Substitutes," WORKING PAPERS SERIES IN THEORETICAL AND APPLIED ECONOMICS 201236, University of Kansas, Department of Economics, revised Aug 2012.
    6. Sunanda Roy & Tarun Sabarwal, 2008. "On the (non-)lattice structure of the equilibrium set in games with strategic substitutes," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 37(1), pages 161-169, October.
    7. Amir, Rabah & De Castro, Luciano, 2017. "Nash equilibrium in games with quasi-monotonic best-responses," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 220-246.
    8. Christian Ewerhart, 2020. "Ordinal potentials in smooth games," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 70(4), pages 1069-1100, November.
    9. Rabah Amir, 2018. "Special issue: supermodularity and monotone methods in economics," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 66(3), pages 547-556, October.
    10. Sunanda Roy & Tarun Sabarwal, 2005. "Comparative Statics with Never Increasing Correspondences," Game Theory and Information 0505001, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 21 Oct 2005.
    11. Echenique, Federico, 2004. "A characterization of strategic complementarities," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 325-347, February.
    12. Finn Christensen, 2019. "Comparative statics and heterogeneity," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 67(3), pages 665-702, April.
    13. AMIR, Rabah, 2003. "Supermodularity and complementarity in economics: an elementary survey," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2003104, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    14. Cao, Zhigang & Chen, Xujin & Qin, Cheng-Zhong & Wang, Changjun & Yang, Xiaoguang, 2018. "Embedding games with strategic complements into games with strategic substitutes," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 45-51.
    15. Charlene Cosandier & Filomena Garcia & Malgorzata Knauff, 2018. "Price competition with differentiated goods and incomplete product awareness," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 66(3), pages 681-705, October.
    16. Amir, Rabah & Bloch, Francis, 2009. "Comparative statics in a simple class of strategic market games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 7-24, January.
    17. Nikolai Kukushkin, 2015. "The single crossing conditions for incomplete preferences," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 44(1), pages 225-251, February.
    18. Prokopovych, Pavlo & Yannelis, Nicholas C., 2017. "On strategic complementarities in discontinuous games with totally ordered strategies," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 147-153.
    19. Gama, Adriana & Rietzke, David, 2019. "Monotone comparative statics in games with non-monotonic best-replies: Contests and Cournot oligopoly," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 823-841.
    20. Magnus Hoffmann & Grégoire Rota‐Graziosi, 2020. "Endogenous timing in the presence of non‐monotonicities," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(1), pages 359-402, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Lattice games; strategic complements; strategic substitutes; strategic hetergeneity; equilibrium set; monotone comparative statics;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C70 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - General
    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games

    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:kan:wpaper:201240. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deuksus.html .

    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: Professor Zongwu Cai (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deuksus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.