Boundedly rational versus optimization-based models of strategic thinking and learning in games

The paper is a comment on the article by R. Harstad and R. Selten and considers the tradeoff between bounded rationality and optimization models in the game-theoretic context. The author shows that in most of the models elements of opimization are still retained and that it is thus more productive to further improve the optimization-based modeling rather than to abandon them altogether in favour of bounded rationality

Cooperative Games with Incomplete Information: Some Open Problems

This is a brief survey describing some of the recent progress and open problems in the area of cooperative games with incomplete information. We discuss exchange economies, cooperative Bayesian games with orthogonal coalitions, and issues of cooperation in non-cooperative Bayesian games.#

An "informationally robust equilibrium" for two-person nonzero-sum games

Game Theory;Equilibrium Theory

BARGAINING, VOTING, AND VALUE

This paper addresses the following issue: If a set of agents bargain on a set of feasible alternatives 'in the shadow' of a voting rule, that is, any agreement can be enforced if a 'winning coalition' supports it, what general agreements are likely to arise? In other words: What influence can the voting rule used to settle (possibly non-unanimous) agreements have on the outcome of negotiations? To give an answer we model the situation as an extension of the Nash bargaining problem in which an arbitrary voting rule replaces unanimity to settle agreements by n players. This provides a setting in which a natural extension of Nash's solution is obtained axiomatically. Two extensions admitting randomization on voting rules based on two informational scenarios are considered.Bargaining, voting, value, bargaining in committees.

Peer Effects in Risk Taking

This paper examines the effect of peers on individual risk taking. In the absence of informational motives, we investigate why social utility concerns may drive peer effects. We test for two main channels: utility from payoff differences and from conforming to the peer. We show experimentally that social utility generates substantial peer effects in risk taking. These are mainly explained by utility from payoff differences, in line with outcomebased social preferences. Contrary to standard assumptions, we show that estimated social preference parameters change significantly when peers make active choices, compared to when lotteries are randomly assigned to them