Evolution of mindsight, transparency and rule-rationality
Evolution of preferences models often assume that all agents display and observe preferences costlessly. Instead, we endogenize mindsight (to observe preferences) and transparency (to show preferences) as slightly costly mechanisms that agents may or may not possess. Unlike in the costless models, we show that universal rule-rationality, mindsight and transparency do not constitute an equilibrium but universal act-rationality, mind-blindness, and opaqueness do. We also find that rule-rationality, mindsight, and transparency may exist in evolved populations, albeit only in a portion of the population whose size fluctuates along an orbit around a focal point. We apply our results to Ultimatum and Trust games to explore how costly and optional mindsight may affect economic performance in interactions among evolved agents.
|Date of creation:||10 Aug 2012|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Ludwigstraße 33, D-80539 Munich, Germany|
Web page: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Eric Schniter & Roman M. Sheremeta & Daniel Sznycer, 2012.
"Building and Rebuilding Trust with Promises and Apologies,"
12-19, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.
- Schniter, Eric & Sheremeta, Roman M. & Sznycer, Daniel, 2013. "Building and rebuilding trust with promises and apologies," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 242-256.
- Schniter, Eric & Sheremeta, Roman & Sznycer, Daniel, 2013. "Building and Rebuilding Trust with Promises and Apologies," MPRA Paper 53596, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- HEIFETZ, Aviad & SHANNON, Chris & SPIEGEL, Yossi, 2003.
"What to maximize if you must,"
CORE Discussion Papers
2003047, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
- Aviad Heifetz & Chris Shannon & Yossi Spiegel, 2003. "What to Maximize If You Must," Game Theory and Information 0303002, EconWPA.
- Aviad Heifetz & Chris Shannon & Yossi Spiegel, 2004. "What to Maximize if You Must," Discussion Papers 1414, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- Chris Shannon, 2003. "What to Maximize if You Must," Theory workshop papers 658612000000000044, UCLA Department of Economics.
- Hessel Oosterbeek & Randolph Sloof & Gijs van de Kuilen, 2004.
"Cultural Differences in Ultimatum Game Experiments: Evidence from a Meta-Analysis,"
Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 7(2), pages 171-188, 06.
- Hessel Oosterbeek & Randolph Sloof & Gijs van de Kuilen, 2004. "Cultural differences in ultimatum game experiments: Evidence from a meta-analysis," Experimental 0401003, EconWPA.
- Mohlin, Erik, 2012.
"Evolution of theories of mind,"
Games and Economic Behavior,
Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 299-318.
- Mohlin, Erik, 2010. "Evolution of Theories of Mind," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance 0728, Stockholm School of Economics, revised 12 May 2010.
- Nikolaus Robalino & Arthur Robson, 2016. "The Evolution of Strategic Sophistication," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(4), pages 1046-1072, April.
- Eddie Dekel & Jeffrey C. Ely & Okan Yilankaya, 2007. "Evolution of Preferences -super-1," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 74(3), pages 685-704.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:40890. 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: (Joachim Winter)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.