IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/usi/wpaper/405.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Drift effect and timing without observability: experimental evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Alessandro Innocenti

    ()

  • Mauro Caminati

    ()

  • Roberto Ricciuti

    ()

Abstract

We provide experimental evidence to Binmore and Samuelson’s (1999) insights for modeling the learning process through which equilibrium is selected. They proposed the concept of drift to describe the effect of perturbations on the dynamic process leading to equilibrium in evolutionary games with boundedly rational agents. We test within a random matched population two different versions of the Dalek game where the forward induction equilibrium weakly iterately dominates the other Nash equilibrium in pure strategies. We also assume that the first mover makes her decision first (“timing”) but the second mover is not informed of the first mover's choice (“lack of observability”). Both players are informed of their position in the sequence and of the fact that the second player will decide without knowing the decision of the first player. If the actual observed choices are only those made by other players in previous interactions, the role played by forward induction is replaced with the learning process taking place within the population. Our results support Binmore and Samuelson’s model because the frequency of the forward induction outcome is payoff-sensitive: it strongly increases when we impose a slight change in the payoffs that does not change equilibrium predictions. This evidence reinforces the evolutionary nature of the drift effect.

Suggested Citation

  • Alessandro Innocenti & Mauro Caminati & Roberto Ricciuti, 2003. "Drift effect and timing without observability: experimental evidence," Department of Economics University of Siena 405, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
  • Handle: RePEc:usi:wpaper:405
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://repec.deps.unisi.it/quaderni/405.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ponti, Giovanni, 2000. "Cycles of Learning in the Centipede Game," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 115-141, January.
    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.
    3. Guth, Werner & Huck, Steffen & Rapoport, Amnon, 1998. "The limitations of the positional order effect: Can it support silent threats and non-equilibrium behavior?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 313-325, February.
    4. Ellison, Glenn, 1993. "Learning, Local Interaction, and Coordination," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(5), pages 1047-1071, September.
    5. Binmore, Ken & McCarthy, John & Ponti, Giovanni & Samuelson, Larry & Shaked, Avner, 2002. "A Backward Induction Experiment," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 104(1), pages 48-88, May.
    6. Young, H Peyton, 1993. "The Evolution of Conventions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(1), pages 57-84, January.
    7. Cooper, Russell & De Jong, Douglas V. & Forsythe, Robert & Ross, Thomas W., 1992. "Forward induction in coordination games," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 167-172, October.
    8. Roth, Alvin E. & Erev, Ido, 1995. "Learning in extensive-form games: Experimental data and simple dynamic models in the intermediate term," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 164-212.
    9. Ken Binmore & Larry Samuelson, 1999. "Evolutionary Drift and Equilibrium Selection," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 66(2), pages 363-393.
    10. Brandts, Jordi & Holt, Charles A., 1995. "Limitations of dominance and forward induction: Experimental evidence," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 49(4), pages 391-395, October.
    11. Kandori, Michihiro & Mailath, George J & Rob, Rafael, 1993. "Learning, Mutation, and Long Run Equilibria in Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(1), pages 29-56, January.
    12. Amershi Amin H. & Sadanand Asha & Sadanand Venkatraman, 1992. "Player importance and forward induction," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 291-297, March.
    13. Roberto Weber & Colin Camerer & Marc Knez, 2004. "Timing and Virtual Observability in Ultimatum Bargaining and “Weak Link” Coordination Games," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 7(1), pages 25-48, February.
    14. Kohlberg, Elon & Mertens, Jean-Francois, 1986. "On the Strategic Stability of Equilibria," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 54(5), pages 1003-1037, September.
    15. R. Muller & Asha Sadanand, 2003. "Order of Play, Forward Induction, and Presentation Effects in Two-Person Games," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 6(1), pages 5-25, June.
    16. Binmore, K. & Samuelson, L., 1995. "Evolutionary Drift and Equilibrium Selection," Working papers 9529, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
    17. Cooper, Russell & Douglas V. DeJong & Robert Forsythe & Thomas W. Ross, 1993. "Forward Induction in the Battle-of-the-Sexes Games," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(5), pages 1303-1316, December.
    18. Uriarte Ayo, José Ramón, 2003. "A Model of Evolutionay Drift," IKERLANAK 2003-01, Universidad del País Vasco - Departamento de Fundamentos del Análisis Económico I.
    19. Amnon Rapoport, 1997. "Order of Play in Strategically Equivalent Games in Extensive Form," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 26(1), pages 113-136.
    20. Friedman, Daniel, 1996. "Equilibrium in Evolutionary Games: Some Experimental Results," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(434), pages 1-25, January.
    21. Balkenborg, Dieter, 1994. "An Experiment on Forward- versus Backward Induction," Discussion Paper Serie B 268, University of Bonn, Germany.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    evolutionary games; experiments; drift; forward induction; order of play. J.E.L. Classification: C72; C91;

    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

    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:usi:wpaper:405. 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: (Fabrizio Becatti). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/desieit.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 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.

    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.