Why gender based game theory?

The behavior of men and women in a number of games free of social issues is explored. The analysis is conducted for simple (2x2) and complex (guessing) games and in static and repeated settings. No gender effect is observed either in static nor in repeated games. It is concluded that gender bias vanishes in the absence of social issues.The financial support from DGICYT(SEJ2004-07554/ECON)

Do Analysts Tell the Truth? Do Shareholders Listen? An Experimental Study of Analysts' Forecasts and Shareholder Reaction

This work experimentally examines forecasting and trading behavior. Subjects play the role of both analyst and shareholder over the course of experiments consisting of a series of repeated games with or absent con icts of interest. In a stylized trading setting, I test whether standard equilibrium, normative behavior, or limited strategic reasoning best predicts behavior. In the presence of con icts of interest a substantial proportion of subjects' behavior appears non-skeptical in the role of shareholder, though the same subject is deceptive in the role of analyst. Absent con icts of interest, subjects behavior in the role of shareholder is nearer a best response to the same subject's behavior as analyst. The results are consistent with limited strategic reasoning and suggest that simply disclosing con icts of interest does not evoke skepticism of forecasting, nor does the elimination of con icts of interest in itself induce honesty.Experimental finance, under-reaction, overreaction, behavior, price inertia, risk aversion

Maximin equilibrium

We introduce a new concept which extends von Neumann and Morgenstern's maximin strategy solution by incorporating 'individual rationality' of the players. Maximin equilibrium, extending Nash's value approach, is based on the evaluation of the strategic uncertainty of the whole game. We show that maximin equilibrium is invariant under strictly increasing transformations of the payoffs. Notably, every finite game possesses a maximin equilibrium in pure strategies. Considering the games in von Neumann-Morgenstern mixed extension, we demonstrate that the maximin equilibrium value is precisely the maximin (minimax) value and it coincides with the maximin strategies in twoperson zerosum games. We also show that for every Nash equilibrium that is not a maximin equilibrium there exists a maximin equilibrium that Pareto dominates it. Hence, a strong Nash equilibrium is always a maximin equilibrium. In addition, a maximin equilibrium is never Pareto dominated by a Nash equilibrium. Finally, we discuss maximin equilibrium predictions in several games including the traveler's dilemma

The focal point in the Traveller’s Dilemma: An Experimental Study

This paper provides an experimental test of the traveller’s dilemma. Our investigation aims to address the research hypothesis that introducing a reference point à la Schelling (set equal to the Pareto optimal solution) might drive people away from rationality even when the size of the penalty/reward is high. Experimental findings reported in this paper provide answers to this question showing that the reference point did not encourage coordination around the Pareto optimal choice

The focal point in the Traveller’s Dilemma: An Experimental Study

This paper provides an experimental test of the traveller’s dilemma. Our investigation aims to address the research hypothesis that introducing a reference point à la Schelling (set equal to the Pareto optimal solution) might drive people away from rationality even when the size of the penalty/reward is high. Experimental findings reported in this paper provide answers to this question showing that the reference point did not encourage coordination around the Pareto optimal choice

Game Mining: How to Make Money from those about to Play a Game

It is known that a player in a noncooperative game can benefit by publicly re- stricting their possible moves before start of play. We show that, more generally, a player may benefit by publicly committing to pay an external party an amount that is contingent on the game's outcome. We explore what happens when external parties (who we call game miners) discover this fact and seek to profit from it by entering an outcome-contingent contract with the players. We analyze various bargaining games between miners and players for determining such an outcome- contingent contract. We establish restrictions on the strategic settings in which a game miner can profit, and bounds on the game miner's profit given various structured bargaining games. These bargaining games include playing the players against one another, as well as allowing the players to pay the miner(s) for exclu- sivity and first-mover advantage. We also establish that when all players can enter contracts with miners, to guarantee the existence of equilibria it is necessary to assume that players can randomize over the contracts they make.

Individual and group behaviours in the traveller’s dilemma: an experimental study

This paper provides an experimental test of the traveller’s dilemma using individual and group data. Our investigation aims to address three fundamental research questions, which can be summarised as follows: (i) claims are affected by the size of the penalty/reward; (ii) individual decisions differ significantly from group decisions; (iii) individual claims are affected by the induction of a focal point a là Schelling. Experimental findings reported in this paper provide answers to each of these questions showing that: (i) although the size of the penalty/reward did not affect subject choices in the first-period, it played a key role in determining subjects’ behaviour in the repeated game; (ii) overall, groups behave more rationally, in the sense that they were always closer to the Nash equilibrium; (iii) the reference point did not encourage coordination around the Pareto optimal choice

Individual and group behaviours in the traveller’s dilemma: an experimental study

This paper provides an experimental test of the traveller’s dilemma using individual and group data. Our investigation aims to address three fundamental research questions, which can be summarised as follows: (i) claims are affected by the size of the penalty/reward; (ii) individual decisions differ significantly from group decisions; (iii) individual claims are affected by the induction of a focal point a là Schelling. Experimental findings reported in this paper provide answers to each of these questions showing that: (i) although the size of the penalty/reward did not affect subject choices in the first-period, it played a key role in determining subjects’ behaviour in the repeated game; (ii) overall, groups behave more rationally, in the sense that they were always closer to the Nash equilibrium; (iii) the reference point did not encourage coordination around the Pareto optimal choice