Multiperson Bargaining and Strategic Complexity¤y
نویسنده
چکیده
We investigate the e®ect of introducing costs of complexity in the n -person unanimity bargaining game. As is well-known, in this game every individually rational allocation is sustainable as a Nash equilibrium (also as a subgame perfect equilibrium if players are su±ciently patient and if n > 2). Moreover, delays in agreement are also possible in such equilibria. By limiting ourselves to a plausible notion of complexity that captures length of memory, we ̄nd that the introduction of complexity costs (lexicographically with the standard payo®s) does not reduce the range of possible allocations but does limit the amount of delay that can occur in any agreement. In particular, we show that in any n-player game, for any allocation z; an agreement on z at any period t can be sustained as a Nash equilibrium of the game with complexity costs if and only if t · n: We use the limit on delay result to establish that, in equilibrium, the strategies implement stationary behaviour. Finally, we also show that \noisy Nash equilibrium" with complexity costs sustains only the unique stationary subgame perfect equilibrium allocation.
منابع مشابه
N-Person Bargaining and Strategic Complexity¤
We investigate the e®ect of introducing costs of complexity in the n -person unanimity bargaining game. In particular, the paper provides a justi ̄cation for stationary equilibrium strategies in the class of games where complexity costs matter. As is well-known, in this game every individually rational allocation is sustainable as a Nash equilibrium (also as a subgame perfect equilibrium if play...
متن کاملBargaining and Market Behavior in Jerusalem, Ljubljana, Pittsburgh, and Tokyo: An Experimental Study
In an experiment comparing related two-person bargaining and multiperson market environments in Israel, Japan, the United States, and Yugoslavia, market outcomes converged to equilibrium everywhere, and there were no payoff-relevant differences among countries. However, bargaining outcomes were everywhere different from the equilibrium predictions (both in observed agreements and in the substan...
متن کاملFrom axiomatic to strategic models of bargaining with logical beliefs and goals
In this paper, we introduce axiomatic and strategic models for bargaining and investigate the link between the two. Bargaining situations are described in propositional logic while the agents’ preferences over the outcomes are expressed as ordinal preferences. Our main contribution is an axiomatic theory of bargaining. We propose a bargaining solution based on the well-known egalitarian social ...
متن کاملBargaining and Boldness
We study a multiperson bargaining problem with general risk preferences through the use of Shaked’s game of cycling offers with exogenous breakdown. If preferences are “smooth,” then as the risk of breakdown vanishes, the limiting outcome is one in which bargainers are equally marginally bold; where a bargainer’s marginal boldness measures his willingness to risk disagreement in return for a ma...
متن کاملAn Investigation into the Effects of Joint Planning on Complexity, Accuracy, and Fluency across Task Complexity
The current study aimed to examine the effects of strategic planning, online planning, strategic planning and online planning combined (joint planning), and no planning on the complexity, accuracy, and fluency of oral productions in two simple and complex narrative tasks. Eighty advanced EFL learners performed one simple narrative task and a complex narrative task with 20 minutes in between. Th...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 1999