(f) Let B₁ = 0, B2 = 16. For each sequentially rational strategy of player 2 you identified in (f), either describe which proposal maximizes player 1's continuation value or explain why it does not exist. (g) Let B₁ = 0, B2 = 16. Describe all SPNE of the game. 1. Consider a variant of the ultimatum game we studied in class in which players have fairness considerations. The timing of the game is as usual. First, player 1 proposes the split (100 - x, x) of a hundred dollars to player 2, where x = [0, 100]. Player 2 observes the split and decides whether to accept (in which case they receive money according to the proposed split) or reject (in which case they both get 0 dollars). Now suppose that each player's utility from an outcome equals the amount of money she gets minus the "unfairness disutility" which is proportional to the squared difference in the monetary outcomes. That is, if an offer of x is accepted by P2, then the "unfairness disutility” of player i equals ẞi(x - (100 - x))², where ẞi is a parameters of the game indicating how strongly player i cares about fairness. Note that if an offer is rejected, they both get $0 and so the disutility term (and, hence, the final utility as well) equals zero. Note also that the case we considered in class corresponds to ẞ₁ = ẞ₂ = 0. (a) Represent this game in extensive form. (b) Let B₁ = 0,2 = 0. Which offers will player 2 definitely accept? reject? Describe all sequentially rational strategies of player 2.
(f) Let B₁ = 0, B2 = 16. For each sequentially rational strategy of player 2 you identified in (f), either describe which proposal maximizes player 1's continuation value or explain why it does not exist. (g) Let B₁ = 0, B2 = 16. Describe all SPNE of the game. 1. Consider a variant of the ultimatum game we studied in class in which players have fairness considerations. The timing of the game is as usual. First, player 1 proposes the split (100 - x, x) of a hundred dollars to player 2, where x = [0, 100]. Player 2 observes the split and decides whether to accept (in which case they receive money according to the proposed split) or reject (in which case they both get 0 dollars). Now suppose that each player's utility from an outcome equals the amount of money she gets minus the "unfairness disutility" which is proportional to the squared difference in the monetary outcomes. That is, if an offer of x is accepted by P2, then the "unfairness disutility” of player i equals ẞi(x - (100 - x))², where ẞi is a parameters of the game indicating how strongly player i cares about fairness. Note that if an offer is rejected, they both get $0 and so the disutility term (and, hence, the final utility as well) equals zero. Note also that the case we considered in class corresponds to ẞ₁ = ẞ₂ = 0. (a) Represent this game in extensive form. (b) Let B₁ = 0,2 = 0. Which offers will player 2 definitely accept? reject? Describe all sequentially rational strategies of player 2.
Chapter1: Making Economics Decisions
Section: Chapter Questions
Problem 1QTC
Related questions
Question
Transcribed Image Text:(f) Let B₁ = 0, B2 = 16. For each sequentially rational strategy of player 2 you identified in (f), either describe which proposal
maximizes player 1's continuation value or explain why it does not exist.
(g) Let B₁ = 0, B2 = 16. Describe all SPNE of the game.
![1. Consider a variant of the ultimatum game we studied in class in which players have fairness considerations. The timing of
the game is as usual. First, player 1 proposes the split (100 - x, x) of a hundred dollars to player 2, where x = [0, 100]. Player 2
observes the split and decides whether to accept (in which case they receive money according to the proposed split) or reject
(in which case they both get 0 dollars).
Now suppose that each player's utility from an outcome equals the amount of money she gets minus the "unfairness disutility"
which is proportional to the squared difference in the monetary outcomes. That is, if an offer of x is accepted by P2, then
the "unfairness disutility” of player i equals ẞi(x - (100 - x))², where ẞi is a parameters of the game indicating how strongly
player i cares about fairness. Note that if an offer is rejected, they both get $0 and so the disutility term (and, hence, the final
utility as well) equals zero. Note also that the case we considered in class corresponds to ẞ₁ = ẞ₂ = 0.
(a) Represent this game in extensive form.
(b) Let B₁ = 0,2 = 0. Which offers will player 2 definitely accept? reject? Describe all sequentially rational strategies of
player 2.](/v2/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcontent.bartleby.com%2Fqna-images%2Fquestion%2F1858a710-c111-4513-9004-6c10bf7d1d6e%2F62702de4-ca26-408e-978b-8d4e9dd15452%2F015hbz_processed.png&w=3840&q=75)
Transcribed Image Text:1. Consider a variant of the ultimatum game we studied in class in which players have fairness considerations. The timing of
the game is as usual. First, player 1 proposes the split (100 - x, x) of a hundred dollars to player 2, where x = [0, 100]. Player 2
observes the split and decides whether to accept (in which case they receive money according to the proposed split) or reject
(in which case they both get 0 dollars).
Now suppose that each player's utility from an outcome equals the amount of money she gets minus the "unfairness disutility"
which is proportional to the squared difference in the monetary outcomes. That is, if an offer of x is accepted by P2, then
the "unfairness disutility” of player i equals ẞi(x - (100 - x))², where ẞi is a parameters of the game indicating how strongly
player i cares about fairness. Note that if an offer is rejected, they both get $0 and so the disutility term (and, hence, the final
utility as well) equals zero. Note also that the case we considered in class corresponds to ẞ₁ = ẞ₂ = 0.
(a) Represent this game in extensive form.
(b) Let B₁ = 0,2 = 0. Which offers will player 2 definitely accept? reject? Describe all sequentially rational strategies of
player 2.
Expert Solution
This question has been solved!
Explore an expertly crafted, step-by-step solution for a thorough understanding of key concepts.
Step by step
Solved in 2 steps
Recommended textbooks for you
Principles of Economics (12th Edition)
Economics
ISBN:
9780134078779
Author:
Karl E. Case, Ray C. Fair, Sharon E. Oster
Publisher:
PEARSON
Engineering Economy (17th Edition)
Economics
ISBN:
9780134870069
Author:
William G. Sullivan, Elin M. Wicks, C. Patrick Koelling
Publisher:
PEARSON
Principles of Economics (12th Edition)
Economics
ISBN:
9780134078779
Author:
Karl E. Case, Ray C. Fair, Sharon E. Oster
Publisher:
PEARSON
Engineering Economy (17th Edition)
Economics
ISBN:
9780134870069
Author:
William G. Sullivan, Elin M. Wicks, C. Patrick Koelling
Publisher:
PEARSON
Principles of Economics (MindTap Course List)
Economics
ISBN:
9781305585126
Author:
N. Gregory Mankiw
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving Approach
Economics
ISBN:
9781337106665
Author:
Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike Shor
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
Managerial Economics & Business Strategy (Mcgraw-…
Economics
ISBN:
9781259290619
Author:
Michael Baye, Jeff Prince
Publisher:
McGraw-Hill Education