Consider the following voting game. There are three players, 1, 2 and 3. And there are three alternatives: A, B and C. Players vote simultaneously for an alternative. Abstaining is not allowed. Thus, the strategy space for each player is {A, B, C}. The alternative with the most votes wins. If no alternative receives a majority, then alternative A is selected. Denote ui(d) the utility obtained by player i if alternave d {A, B, C} is selected. The payoff functions are,
u1 (A) = u2 (B) = u3 (C) = 2
u1 (B) = u2 (C) = u3 (A) = 1
u1 (C) = u2 (A) = u3 (B) = 0
a. Let us denote by (i, j, k) a profile of pure strategies where player 1’s strategy is (to vote for) i, player 2’s strategy is j and player 3’s strategy is k. Show that the pure strategy profiles (A,A,A) and (A,B,A) are both Nash equilibria.
b. Is (A,A,B) a Nash equilibrium? Comment.
Trending nowThis is a popular solution!
Step by stepSolved in 2 steps
- Jane is interested in buying a car from a used car dealer. Her maximum willingness to pay for thecar is 12 ($12,000). Bo, the dealer, is willing to sell the car as long as he receives at least 9($9,000). What is the Nash bargaining solution to this game?arrow_forwardIf a strategy profile is a Nash equilibrium, there is at least one player that could achieve higher payoffs by deviating.(a) True. (b) False.arrow_forwardSuppose the following game is played infinite times in the future. Time discount is 0.90. What should be the value of x so that the equilibrium strategy is (Cooperate, Cooperate)? Player 2 Player 1 Cooperate Defect Cooperate (x, x) (2, 14) Defect (14, 2) (5, 5)arrow_forward
- Within a voluntary contribution game, the Nash equilibrium level of contribution is zero, but in experiments, it is often possible to sustain positive levels of contribution for a long period. How might we best explain this? A) Participants are altruistic, and so value the payoff which other participants receive, benefiting (indirectly) from making a contribution. B) Participants believe that if they make a contribution, then other participants will be more likely to make a contribution. C) Participants in experiments believe that they have to make contributions in order to receive any payoff from their participation. D) Participants have experience of working in situations in which cooperation can be sustained for mutual benefit and so have internalised a social norm of cooperationarrow_forwardSuppose that you are a manager. You are considering whether or not to monitor employees with the payoffs in the normal-form accompanying game. Worker Work Shirk Manager Monitor -1,1 1,-1 Don't Monitor 1,-1 -1,1 Which of the following pairs of strategies constitutes a Nash equilibrium? Multiple Choice Manager monitors and worker shirks. Manager does not monitor and worker works. Manager monitors and worker works. O None of the answers is correct.arrow_forwardThere are three bidders participating in a first-price auction for a painting. Each bidder has a private, independent value vi for such a painting that is drawn uniformly from [0,1] Assume that each bidder i has a linear bidding function bi=avi, where a>0. What is the bidding strategy of bidder i , namely bi in the Bayesian equilibrium?arrow_forward
- Problem 4: Consider an infinitely repeated game, where the base game is the following 2-person 2x2 game: A A 0,0 10, 10 S1: choose A always S2: choose B always B 10, 10 0,0 Assume both players discount the future at the same rate of r, 0 < r < 1. Limiting each player's strategies to the following six possibilities, S3: Choose A then mimic the other player's previous choice S4: Choose B, then mimic the other player's previous choice S5: Choose A, then choose the opposite of the other player's previous choice S6: Choose B, then choose the opposite of the other player's previous choice a. present the strategic form of this game, b. identify all pure-strategy Nash equilibria c. does repetition with these strategies "solve" the coordination dilemma that confronts the players in the single play of the above game.arrow_forwardThe ultimatum game is a game in economic experiments. The first player (the proposer) receives a sum of money and proposes a fair proposal (F - 5;5) or unfair proposal (U - 8;2). The second player (the responder) chooses to either accept (A) or reject (R) this proposal. If the second player accepts, the money is split according to the proposal. If the second player rejects, neither player receives any money. 1 A 5:5 2 F R 0:0 U A 8:2 2 1. Find the subgame perfect Nash Equilibrium using backward induction. R 0;0arrow_forwardNonearrow_forward
- Principles of Economics (12th Edition)EconomicsISBN:9780134078779Author:Karl E. Case, Ray C. Fair, Sharon E. OsterPublisher:PEARSONEngineering Economy (17th Edition)EconomicsISBN:9780134870069Author:William G. Sullivan, Elin M. Wicks, C. Patrick KoellingPublisher:PEARSON
- Principles of Economics (MindTap Course List)EconomicsISBN:9781305585126Author:N. Gregory MankiwPublisher:Cengage LearningManagerial Economics: A Problem Solving ApproachEconomicsISBN:9781337106665Author:Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike ShorPublisher:Cengage LearningManagerial Economics & Business Strategy (Mcgraw-...EconomicsISBN:9781259290619Author:Michael Baye, Jeff PrincePublisher:McGraw-Hill Education