Two players are bargaining over a three period bargaining model as discussed in class with player 1 making offers in rounds 1 and 3. Player 2 makes an offer in round 2 only. Each player has a common discount factor delta. The two players are bargaining to split $20. They have three time periods available to them for their bargaining game. At the end of round 3, if no agreement has been reached then player 1 receives $2 and player 2 receives $1 and the rest of the money

Two players are bargaining over a three period bargaining model as discussed in class with player 1 making offers in rounds 1 and 3. Player 2 makes an offer in round 2 only. Each player has a common discount factor delta. The two players are bargaining to split $20. They have three time periods available to them for their bargaining game. At the end of round 3, if no agreement has been reached then player 1 receives $2 and player 2 receives $1 and the rest of the money

ENGR.ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

14th Edition

ISBN:9780190931919

Author:NEWNAN

Publisher:NEWNAN

Chapter1: Making Economics Decisions

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 1QTC

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

Refer to Table Left-Right-ZigZag. How many pure strategy Nash equilibria does this game have? Table: Left-Right-ZigZag Player 1 Drive left Driver right Zigzag 1) 1 2) 2 3) 3 4) 4 5) None of the above. Drive left (1,1) (-1,-1) (0,0) Player 2 Driver right (-1,-1) (1,1) (0,0) Zigzag (0,0) (0,0) (0,0)
Analyze the following game. Create payoff bimatrices consistent with the information given. Explain your choices. Then find the maximin moves, all dominated strategies for all players. Game: Adam, Bill, and Cindy are registering for a foreign language class independently and simultaneously. The available classes are ITA100 and FRE100. They d not care much which, but they care with whom they share the class. Bill and Cindy want to be in the same class, but want to avoid Adam. Adam wants to be in the same class as Bill or Cindy, or even better, both.
Mr. and Mrs. Ward typically vote oppositely in elections and so their votes “cancel each other out.” They each gain two units of utility from a vote for their positions (and lose two units of utility from a vote against their positions). However, the bother of actually voting costs each one unit of utility. Diagram a game in which they choose whether to vote or not to vote.
In the collusion game, collusion was only sustainable in the infinite horizon repeated game. One Nash Equilibrium of that game can be found when all players play a “grim trigger” strategy, where they collude until an opponent chooses to compete, and then compete for all future rounds as a punishment. In such a game, if the one period bonus that comes from competing is low enough, firms always collude and the punishment is never triggered. Is the punishment (vowing to compete forever after one deviates) realistic, especially if firms can communicate freely? Why or why not? (Hint: Is a grim trigger Nash Equilibrium a Subgame Perfect Nash Equilibrium? What kinds of Nash Equilibria does Subgame erfection rule out in sequential games?)
Suppose that, in an ultimatum game, the proposer may not propose less than $1 nor fractional amounts, and therefore must propose $1, $2, …, or $10 (see image attached below). The responder must Accept (A) or Reject (R). Suppose, first, that this game is played by two egoists, for whom u(x,y)=x. Find all subgame-perfect equilibria in this game. Suppose, second, that this game is played by two altruists, for whom u(x,y) = ⅔(x)1/2 + ⅓(y)1/2. Find all subgame-perfect equilibria in this game.
Player 1 and player 2 are playing a simultaneous-move one-shot game, where player 1 can move "up" or "down" and player 2 can move "left" or "right" The payoffs for the game are shown in the payoff matrix. The first number of each cell represents player 1's payoff, and the second number is player 2's. Use the matrix to answer the questions below. Player 1 2nd attempt Part 1 Part 2 Which of the following outcomes is a pure strategy Nash equilibrium of this game? P = (1-P) = Up Down Part 3 9= Left -16, -18 -20,7 Choose one or more: A. There is no pure strategy Nash equilibrium in this game. OB. Player 1 plays up; player 2 plays left. OC. Player 1 plays up; player 2 plays right. □ D. Player 1 plays down; player 2 plays left. O E. Player 1 plays down; player 2 plays right. Player 2 Suppose player 1 assigns probability p to playing up and (1 - p) to playing down. What do p and (1-p) have to be such that player 2 is indifferent between playing left and right? Round all answers to two decimal…
3. Two individuals are involved in a synergistic relationship. If both individuals devote more effort to the relationship, they are both better off. Specifically, an effort level is a nonnegative number, and player 1's payoff function is e₁(1+€₂-e₁), where ei is player i's effort level. For player 2 the cost of effort is either the same as that of player 1, and hence her payoff function is given by e2(1+e₁ - e₂), or effort is very costly for her in which case her payoff function is given by e₂(1 + e₁ — 2e2). 1 Player 2 knows player 1's payoff function and whether the cost of effort is high for herself or not. Player 1, however, is uncertain about player 2's cost of effort. He believes that the cost of effort is low with probability p, and high with probability 1 - p, where 0 < p < 1. Find the Bayesian Nash equilibrium of this game as a function of p.
In a three stage alternating offers bargaining game, player 1 demands a fraction x of $100. If this is accepted by player 2, the $100 is split between the players with outcome ($100x,$100(1 - x)). Otherwise, at stage 2, player 2 makes a demand for a fraction y. If this is accepted by player 1, the $100 is divided accordingly but otherwise player 1 can make another offer and demand a fraction z. If that offer is rejected by player 2, the outcome is (0,0). Both players have a discount factor of 1/2. (a) Find a perfect equilibrium for this game. (b) Is there a first-mover advantage?
Finding Nash Equilibria Consider the following two player, normal form game: Player 1 Player 2 C L (2,1) U M (-2,-2) D R (2, -1) (1,2) (-1, 1) (0,0) (3,1) (0,0) (-1,-1) Find all pure and mixed strategy Nash equilibria. Calculate each player's expected payoffs at each equilibrium.
Consider the following two player game. In each cell the first number refers to the payoff to Player 1 while the second number refers to the payoff to Player 2. Suppose the two players move simultaneously (at the same time). Which one of the following statements is CORRECT? Player #1 Player #2 Top Bottom Left 7.7 4.0 Right 0,4 4,4 O There are three equilibria in this game: two pure strategy equilibria at [Top, Left] and [Bottom, Right) and al third equilibrium in mixed strategies. In the mixed strategy equilibrium of this game. Player 1 should play Top with probability 2/5 and Bottom with probability 3/5; Player 2 should play Left with probability 2/5 and Right with probability 3/5. O There are three equilibria in this game; two pure strategy equilibria at (Top. Left) and (Bottom, Right) and a third equilibrium in mixed strategies. In the mixed strategy equilibrium of this game, both players should randomize over the strategies with probability and %. O There is a unique dominant…
Please help with #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). But now player i's utility equals to her monetary utility minus the disutility from unfairness proportional to the difference in the monetary outcomes. That is, given a final split (m1, m2), let u1(m1, m2) = m1 – B1(m1 -– m2)² u1(m1, m2) = m2 - B2(m1 – m2)², where B1, B2 are parameters of the game indicating how strongly players care about fairness. Note that the case we considered in class corresponds to ß1 = B2 = 0.