IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/qsh/wpaper/89386.html

Optimal Truncation in Matching Markets

Author

Listed:
  • Peter A. Coles
  • Ran I. Shorrer

Abstract

Although no stable matching mechanism can induce truth-telling as a dominant strategy for all participants (Roth, 1982), recent studies have presented conditions under which truthful reporting by all agents is close to optimal (Immorlica and Mahdian, 2005, Kojima and Pathak, 2009 and Lee, 2011). Our results demonstrate that in large, uniform markets using the Men-Proposing Deferred Acceptance Algorithm, each woman's best response to truthful behavior by all other agents is to truncate her list substantially. In fact, the optimal degree of truncation for such a woman goes to 100% of her list as the market size grows large. In general one-to-one markets we provide comparative statics for optimal truncation strategies: reduction in risk aversion and reduced correlation across preferences each lead agents to truncate more. So while several recent papers focused on the limits of strategic manipulation, our results serve as a reminder that without pre-conditions ensuring truthful reporting, there exists a potential for significant manipulation even in settings where agents have little information.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter A. Coles & Ran I. Shorrer, "undated". "Optimal Truncation in Matching Markets," Working Paper 89386, Harvard University OpenScholar.
  • Handle: RePEc:qsh:wpaper:89386
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://scholar.harvard.edu/ran/node/89386
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Eden Hartman & Erel Segal-Halevi & Biaoshuai Tao, 2025. "It's Not All Black and White: Degree of Truthfulness for Risk-Avoiding Agents," Papers 2502.18805, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2026.
    3. Rheingans-Yoo, Ross, 2024. "Large random matching markets with localized preference structures can exhibit large cores," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 71-83.
    4. Christian Haas & Margeret Hall, 2019. "Two-Sided Matching for mentor-mentee allocations—Algorithms and manipulation strategies," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(3), pages 1-27, March.
    5. Braun, Sebastian & Dwenger, Nadja & Kübler, Dorothea & Westkamp, Alexander, 2014. "Implementing quotas in university admissions: An experimental analysis," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 232-251.
    6. Vincent Meisner, 2023. "Report-Dependent Utility and Strategy-Proofness," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(5), pages 2733-2745, May.
    7. Marcelo Ariel Fernandez & Kirill Rudov & Leeat Yariv, 2022. "Centralized Matching with Incomplete Information," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 4(1), pages 18-33, March.
    8. Allan Borodin & Joanna Drummond & Kate Larson & Omer Lev, 2025. "Natural interviewing equilibria in matching settings," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 64(3), pages 483-527, May.
    9. Ashlagi, Itai & Nikzad, Afshin & Romm, Assaf, 2019. "Assigning more students to their top choices: A comparison of tie-breaking rules," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 167-187.
    10. Assaf Romm, 2014. "Implications of capacity reduction and entry in many-to-one stable matching," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 43(4), pages 851-875, December.
    11. Christian Haas, 2021. "Two-Sided Matching with Indifferences: Using Heuristics to Improve Properties of Stable Matchings," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 57(4), pages 1115-1148, April.
    12. Rustamdjan Hakimov & Dorothea Kübler & Siqi Pan, 2023. "Costly information acquisition in centralized matching markets," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 14(4), pages 1447-1490, November.
    13. Marco Castillo & Ahrash Dianat, 2021. "Strategic uncertainty and equilibrium selection in stable matching mechanisms: experimental evidence," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(4), pages 1365-1389, December.
    14. Paula Jaramillo & Çaǧatay Kayı & Flip Klijn, 2014. "On the exhaustiveness of truncation and dropping strategies in many-to-many matching markets," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 42(4), pages 793-811, April.
    15. Itai Ashlagi & Mark Braverman & Amin Saberi & Clayton Thomas & Geng Zhao, 2020. "Tiered Random Matching Markets: Rank is Proportional to Popularity," Papers 2009.05124, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2021.
    16. Janine Balter & Michela Rancan & Olena Senyuta, 2014. "Truncation in the Matching Markets and Market Ineffciency," RSCAS Working Papers 2014/04, European University Institute.
    17. Martin Van der Linden, 2019. "Deferred acceptance is minimally manipulable," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 48(2), pages 609-645, June.
    18. Benjamin N. Roth & Ran I. Shorrer, 2021. "Making Marketplaces Safe: Dominant Individual Rationality and Applications to Market Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(6), pages 3694-3713, June.
    19. Castillo, Marco & Dianat, Ahrash, 2016. "Truncation strategies in two-sided matching markets: Theory and experiment," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 180-196.
    20. Qiufu Chen & Yuanmei Li & Xiaopeng Yin & Luosai Zhang & Siyi Zhou, 2024. "The Machiavellian frontier of stable mechanisms," Papers 2405.12804, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2024.
    21. Itai Ashlagi & Mark Braverman & Yash Kanoria & Peng Shi, 2020. "Clearing Matching Markets Efficiently: Informative Signals and Match Recommendations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(5), pages 2163-2193, May.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C78 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Bargaining Theory; Matching Theory
    • C62 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Existence and Stability Conditions of Equilibrium
    • D47 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Market Design
    • D61 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Allocative Efficiency; Cost-Benefit Analysis

    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:qsh:wpaper:89386. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Richard Brandon The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Richard Brandon to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cbrssus.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.