3. The repeated prisoner's dilemma (PD) can be used as a simple framework to inves- tigate tacit collusion. Consider repeating the following stage game: A B A R, R 100, 24 B 24, 100 50, 50 where R is either 64 or 96. In each round, the players simultaneous choose an action (A or B). After both have made their choice the outcome is revealed, along with the payoffs for the round. Then a random number is drawn to determine whether the repeated game will continue for at least one more round. The probability the game will continue is c5, which is either ¹ or ³. 2 4 (a) Suppose the stage game were played just once (which is equivalent to c5 = 0). Find the Pareto efficient outcomes in the stage game. Does either player have a dominated strategy; if so, which? What is the one-shot Nash equilibrium pre- diction of the stage game? How does this prediction vary with the parameter R? (b) For the indefinitely repeated game, explain: i. Why both players choosing the strategy All B is a subgame perfect Nash equilibrium for all combinations of c5 and R. All B is the strategy that chooses B initially, then chooses B in any subsequent round, irrespective of the out- come from any previous round. ii. Why both players choosing the strategy Grim AB is a subgame perfect Nash equilibrium for for all combinations of c5 and R, except when c5 and R = 64. Grim AB is the strategy that chooses A initially, then chooses A again in a subsequent round if the outcome from every previous round was (A, A); otherwise (i.e. if someone, including themselves, choose B at some previous round), it chooses B in all subsequent rounds. = 1 2 (c) Prior experimental evidence suggests that the cooperation rate in such re- peated PDs is typically very low when cooperation is not part of a subgame perfect Nash equilibrium. Furthermore cooperation is greatly facilitated by larger rewards to cooperation (relative to the temptation to cheat) and a larger probability of continuation. Explain how you would design a set of treatments to test this hypothesis. Make sure you explain how you could use the data generated by the experiment to test the hypothesis.
3. The repeated prisoner's dilemma (PD) can be used as a simple framework to inves- tigate tacit collusion. Consider repeating the following stage game: A B A R, R 100, 24 B 24, 100 50, 50 where R is either 64 or 96. In each round, the players simultaneous choose an action (A or B). After both have made their choice the outcome is revealed, along with the payoffs for the round. Then a random number is drawn to determine whether the repeated game will continue for at least one more round. The probability the game will continue is c5, which is either ¹ or ³. 2 4 (a) Suppose the stage game were played just once (which is equivalent to c5 = 0). Find the Pareto efficient outcomes in the stage game. Does either player have a dominated strategy; if so, which? What is the one-shot Nash equilibrium pre- diction of the stage game? How does this prediction vary with the parameter R? (b) For the indefinitely repeated game, explain: i. Why both players choosing the strategy All B is a subgame perfect Nash equilibrium for all combinations of c5 and R. All B is the strategy that chooses B initially, then chooses B in any subsequent round, irrespective of the out- come from any previous round. ii. Why both players choosing the strategy Grim AB is a subgame perfect Nash equilibrium for for all combinations of c5 and R, except when c5 and R = 64. Grim AB is the strategy that chooses A initially, then chooses A again in a subsequent round if the outcome from every previous round was (A, A); otherwise (i.e. if someone, including themselves, choose B at some previous round), it chooses B in all subsequent rounds. = 1 2 (c) Prior experimental evidence suggests that the cooperation rate in such re- peated PDs is typically very low when cooperation is not part of a subgame perfect Nash equilibrium. Furthermore cooperation is greatly facilitated by larger rewards to cooperation (relative to the temptation to cheat) and a larger probability of continuation. Explain how you would design a set of treatments to test this hypothesis. Make sure you explain how you could use the data generated by the experiment to test the hypothesis.
Chapter1: Making Economics Decisions
Section: Chapter Questions
Problem 1QTC
Related questions
Question
Transcribed Image Text:3. The repeated prisoner's dilemma (PD) can be used as a simple framework to inves-
tigate tacit collusion. Consider repeating the following stage game:
A
B
A
R, R
100, 24
B
24, 100
50, 50
where R is either 64 or 96. In each round, the players simultaneous choose an action
(A or B). After both have made their choice the outcome is revealed, along with the
payoffs for the round. Then a random number is drawn to determine whether the
repeated game will continue for at least one more round. The probability the game
will continue is c5, which is either ¹ or ³.
2
4
(a) Suppose the stage game were played just once (which is equivalent to c5 = 0).
Find the Pareto efficient outcomes in the stage game. Does either player have
a dominated strategy; if so, which? What is the one-shot Nash equilibrium pre-
diction of the stage game? How does this prediction vary with the parameter
R?
(b)
For the indefinitely repeated game, explain:
i. Why both players choosing the strategy All B is a subgame perfect Nash
equilibrium for all combinations of c5 and R. All B is the strategy that chooses
B initially, then chooses B in any subsequent round, irrespective of the out-
come from any previous round.
ii. Why both players choosing the strategy Grim AB is a subgame perfect
Nash equilibrium for for all combinations of c5 and R, except when c5
and R = 64. Grim AB is the strategy that chooses A initially, then chooses
A again in a subsequent round if the outcome from every previous round
was (A, A); otherwise (i.e. if someone, including themselves, choose B at
some previous round), it chooses B in all subsequent rounds.
=
1
2
(c)
Prior experimental evidence suggests that the cooperation rate in such re-
peated PDs is typically very low when cooperation is not part of a subgame
perfect Nash equilibrium. Furthermore cooperation is greatly facilitated by
larger rewards to cooperation (relative to the temptation to cheat) and a larger
probability of continuation. Explain how you would design a set of treatments
to test this hypothesis. Make sure you explain how you could use the data
generated by the experiment to test the hypothesis.
Expert Solution
This question has been solved!
Explore an expertly crafted, step-by-step solution for a thorough understanding of key concepts.
This is a popular solution!
Trending now
This is a popular solution!
Step by step
Solved in 3 steps
Knowledge Booster
Learn more about
Need a deep-dive on the concept behind this application? Look no further. Learn more about this topic, economics and related others by exploring similar questions and additional content below.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