IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mib/wpaper/545.html

A Max-Min Two-Group Contest with Binary Actions and Incomplete Information à la Global Games

Author

Listed:
  • Davide Bosco
  • Mario Gilli
  • Andrea Sorrentino

Abstract

The main novelty of this paper is the introduction of incomplete information à la global games into max-min group contests with binary actions. Depending on whether the complete information assumption is relaxed on the value of the prize or on the cost of providing effort, we obtain different results in terms of equilibrium selection: in the first case, there exist both an equilibrium in (monotonic) switching strategies and an equilibrium robust to incomplete information in the sense of Kajii and Morris [1997], in which no player exerts effort in both groups, whereas in the second one there exists a unique equilibrium in (monotonic) switching-strategies. Then, we discuss the presence of the group-size paradox for both classes of games. The results are thus extended to the case of M groups, and the properties of Bayes-Nash equilibria for these classes of games are investigated. Finally, we show a limit-uniqueness and a noise independent selection result.

Suggested Citation

  • Davide Bosco & Mario Gilli & Andrea Sorrentino, 2024. "A Max-Min Two-Group Contest with Binary Actions and Incomplete Information à la Global Games," Working Papers 545, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised Mar 2025.
    • Handle: RePEc:mib:wpaper:545
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://repec.dems.unimib.it/repec/pdf/mibwpaper545.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Subhasish M. Chowdhury & Dongryul Lee & Iryna Topolyan, 2016. "The Max-Min Group Contest: Weakest-link (Group) All-Pay Auction," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 83(1), pages 105-125, July.
    2. Carlsson, H. & van Damme, E.E.C., 1991. "Equilibrium selection in stag hunt games," Discussion Paper 1991-70, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Davide Bosco & Mario Gilli & Andrea Sorrentino, 2025. "Max-Max Group Contests with Incomplete Information à la Global Games," Working Papers 548, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised Feb 2026.
    2. van Damme, Eric & Hurkens, Sjaak, 1999. "Endogenous Stackelberg Leadership," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 105-129, July.
    3. Bose, Gautam & Konrad, Kai A., 2020. "Devil take the hindmost: Deflecting attacks to other defenders," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    4. Olga Shurchkov, 2013. "Coordination and learning in dynamic global games: experimental evidence," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 16(3), pages 313-334, September.
    5. Ariel Singerman & Pilar Useche, 2019. "The Role of Strategic Uncertainty in Area-wide Pest Management Decisions of Florida Citrus Growers," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 101(4), pages 991-1011.
    6. Heggedal, Tom-Reiel & Helland, Leif & Neset Joslin, Knut-Eric, 2018. "Should I Stay or should I Go? Bandwagons in the lab," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 86-97.
    7. Eisenbach, Thomas M., 2017. "Rollover risk as market discipline: A two-sided inefficiency," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(2), pages 252-269.
    8. Konrad, Kai A. & Morath, Florian, 2023. "How to preempt attacks in multi-front conflict with limited resources," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 305(1), pages 493-500.
    9. Xue, J., 2006. "Collective Behavior with Endogenous Thresholds," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0613, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    10. Peter Zimmerman, 2020. "Blockchain structure and cryptocurrency prices," Bank of England working papers 855, Bank of England.
    11. Heinemann, Frank & Illing, Gerhard, 2002. "Speculative attacks: unique equilibrium and transparency," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 429-450, December.
    12. Subhasish M. Chowdhury & Iryna Topolyan, 2016. "Best-shot versus weakest-link in political lobbying: an application of group all-pay auction," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(4), pages 959-971, December.
    13. Marinacci, Massimo, 2000. "Ambiguous Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 191-219, May.
    14. Pasquale Scaramozzino & Nir Vulkan, 2004. "Uncertainty and Endogenous Selection of Economic Equilibria," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(1), pages 22-40, February.
    15. Lensberg, Terje & Schenk-Hoppé, Klaus Reiner, 2021. "Cold play: Learning across bimatrix games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 419-441.
    16. Morris, Stephen & Shin, Hyun Song, 2004. "Coordination risk and the price of debt," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 133-153, February.
    17. Teng, Jimmy, 2018. "Schelling Point as a Refinement of Nash Equilibrium," Conference Papers 10484, Graduate School of Management, St. Petersburg State University.
    18. Zhang, Lei & Zhang, Lin & Zheng, Yong, 2013. "Wholesale Funding, Coordination, and Credit Risk," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 124, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    19. Maria Arbatskaya & Hideo Konishi, 2025. "Dynamic team contests with complementary efforts," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 29(3), pages 611-633, September.
    20. Tetsuya Kawamura & Tiffany Tsz Kwan Tse, 2022. "Intelligence promotes cooperation in long-term interaction: experimental evidence in infinitely repeated public goods games," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 17(4), pages 927-946, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D74 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Conflict; Conflict Resolution; Alliances; Revolutions
    • D71 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations
    • 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:mib:wpaper:545. 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: Matteo Pelagatti (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dpmibit.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.