IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Loss Aversion in Repeated Games

  • Jonathan Shalev

    (CORE)

The Nash equilibrium solution concept for strategic form games is based on the assumption of expected utility maximization. Reference dependent utility functions (in which utility is determined not only by an outcome, but also by the relationship of the outcome to a reference point) are a better predictor of behavior than expected utility. In a repeated situation, the value of the previous payoff is a natural reference point for evaluating each period's payoff, and loss aversion implies that decreases are treated more severely than increases. We characterize the equilibria of infinitely repeated games for the case of extreme loss aversion, and show how these are related to the equilibria of stochastic games with state-independent transitions.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://econwpa.repec.org/eps/game/papers/9802/9802005.tex
Download Restriction: no

File URL: http://econwpa.repec.org/eps/game/papers/9802/9802005.ps.gz
Download Restriction: no

File URL: http://econwpa.repec.org/eps/game/papers/9802/9802005.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by EconWPA in its series Game Theory and Information with number 9802005.

as
in new window

Length: 22 pages
Date of creation: 10 Feb 1998
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpga:9802005
Note: Type of Document - LaTeX; prepared on IBM PC ; to print on PostScript; pages: 22 ; figures: included
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://econwpa.repec.org

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.:

as in new window
  1. Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Levine's Working Paper Archive 7656, David K. Levine.
  2. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. " Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
  3. Ferreira J. -L. & Gilboa I. & Maschler M., 1995. "Credible Equilibria in Games with Utilities Changing during the Play," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 284-317, August.
  4. MERTENS , Jean-François & SORIN , Sylvain & ZAMIR , Shmuel, 1994. "Repeated Games. Part B : The Central Results," CORE Discussion Papers 1994021, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
  5. Jonathan Shalev, 1997. "Loss Aversion Equilibrium," Game Theory and Information 9703001, EconWPA, revised 11 Mar 1997.
  6. Rabin, Matthew, 1993. "Incorporating Fairness into Game Theory and Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(5), pages 1281-1302, December.
  7. MERTENS, Jean-François & SORIN , Sylvain & ZAMIR , Shmuel, 1994. "Repeated Games. Part C : Further Developments," CORE Discussion Papers 1994022, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
  8. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1991. "Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference-Dependent Model," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 106(4), pages 1039-61, November.
  9. MERTENS , Jean-François & SORIN , Sylvain & ZAMIR , Shmuel, 1994. "Repeated Games. Part A : Background Material," CORE Discussion Papers 1994020, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
  10. Shalev, Jonathan, 1997. "Loss aversion in a multi-period model," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 203-226, June.
  11. Gilboa, Itzhak, 1989. "Expectation and Variation in Multi-period Decisions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(5), pages 1153-69, September.
  12. Daniel Kahneman & Jack L. Knetsch & Richard H. Thaler, 1991. "Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 193-206, Winter.
  13. Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L & Thaler, Richard H, 1990. "Experimental Tests of the Endowment Effect and the Coase Theorem," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(6), pages 1325-48, December.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpga:9802005. 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: (EconWPA)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.