Contests, Managerial Incentives, Stock Price Manipulation, and Advance Selling Strategies: Introduction
In: Pacific economic review, Band 18, Heft 2, S. 162-163
ISSN: 1468-0106
12 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Pacific economic review, Band 18, Heft 2, S. 162-163
ISSN: 1468-0106
In: Journal of economics, Band 106, Heft 2, S. 119-132
ISSN: 1617-7134
In: Journal of institutional and theoretical economics: JITE, Band 174, Heft 3, S. 476
ISSN: 1614-0559
In: Cowles Foundation Discussion Paper No. 2095
SSRN
Working paper
In: Games and Economic Behavior, Forthcoming
SSRN
Working paper
In: The B.E. journal of theoretical economics, Band 23, Heft 2, S. 697-721
ISSN: 1935-1704
Abstract
This paper introduces a family of domains of bargaining problems allowing for non-convexity. For each domain in this family, single-valued bargaining solutions satisfying the Nash axioms are explicitly characterized as solutions of the iterated maximization of Nash products weighted by the row vectors of the associated bargaining weight matrices. This paper also introduces a simple procedure to standardize bargaining weight matrices for each solution into an equivalent triangular bargaining weight matrix, which is simplified and easy to use for applications. Furthermore, the standardized bargaining weight matrix can be recovered from bargaining solutions of simple problems. This recovering result provides an empirical framework for determining the bargaining weights.
SSRN
Working paper
In: USC-INET Research Paper No. 17-30
SSRN
Working paper
In: International Journal of Game Theory
SSRN
Working paper
SSRN
Working paper
A model of coalition government formation is presented in which inefficient, non-minimal winning coalitions may form in Nash equilibrium. Predictions for five games are presented and tested experimentally. The experimental data support potential maximization as a refinement of Nash equilibrium. In particular, the data support the prediction that non-minimal winning coalitions occur when the distance between policy positions of the parties is small relative to the value of forming the government. These conditions hold in games 1, 3, 4 and 5, where subjects played their unique potential-maximizing strategies 91, 52, 82 and 84 percent of the time, respectively. In the remaining game (Game 2) experimental data support the prediction of a minimal winning coalition. Players A and B played their unique potential-maximizing strategies 84 and 86 percent of the time, respectively, and the predicted minimal-winning government formed 92 percent of the time (all strategy choices for player C conform with potential maximization in Game 2). In Games 1, 2, 4 and 5 over 98 percent of the observed Nash equilibrium outcomes were those predicted by potential maximization. Other solution concepts including iterated elimination of dominated strategies and strong/coalition proof Nash equilibrium are also tested.
BASE
In: Journal of Mathematical Economics, Forthcoming
SSRN
Working paper