EBK INTERMEDIATE MICROECONOMICS AND ITS
12th Edition
ISBN: 9781305176386
Author: Snyder
Publisher: YUZU
expand_more
expand_more
format_list_bulleted
Question
Chapter 17.3, Problem 1.1MQ
To determine
Choosing of B or D in Kahneman and Tversky scenarios
Expert Solution & Answer
Want to see the full answer?
Check out a sample textbook solution
Students have asked these similar questions
Consider the two Nash equilibria found above. Is any one of them a Perfect Bayesian Equilibrium (PBE)? Explain. In particular, consider each NE and argue why they are or are not part of a PBE. [Note: A complete description of PBE must specify beliefs as a part of description of the equilibrium.]
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Suppose you can take one of two summer jobs. In the first job as a flight attendant, with a salary of $5,000, you estimate the probability you will die is 1 in 40,000. Alternatively, you could drive a truck transporting hazardous materials, which pays $12,000 and for which the probability of death is 1 in 10,000. Suppose that you're indifferent between the two jobs except for the pay and the chance of death. If you choose the job as a flight attendant, what does this say about the value you place on your life?
In 'the dictator' game, one player (the dictator) chooses how to divide a pot of $10 between herself and another player (the recipient). The recipient does not have an opportunity to reject the proposed distribution. As such, if the dictator only cares about how much money she makes, she should keep all $10 for herself and give the recipient nothing. However, when economists conduct experiments with the dictator game, they find that dictators often offer strictly positive amounts to the recipients.
Are dictators behaving irrationally in these experiments? Whether you think they are or not, your response should try to provide an explanation for the behavior.
Chapter 17 Solutions
EBK INTERMEDIATE MICROECONOMICS AND ITS
Ch. 17.3 - Prob. 1MQCh. 17.3 - Prob. 2MQCh. 17.3 - Prob. 1.1MQCh. 17.3 - Prob. 1.2MQCh. 17.3 - Prob. 2.2MQCh. 17.3 - Prob. 1.3MQCh. 17.3 - Prob. 1TTACh. 17.3 - Prob. 2TTACh. 17.4 - Prob. 1TTACh. 17.4 - Prob. 2TTA
Ch. 17.4 - Prob. 1.1TTACh. 17.4 - Prob. 2.1TTACh. 17.4 - Prob. 1MQCh. 17.4 - Prob. 1.2TTACh. 17.4 - Prob. 2.2TTACh. 17.5 - Prob. 1MQCh. 17.5 - Prob. 2MQCh. 17.6 - Prob. 1TTACh. 17.6 - Prob. 2TTACh. 17 - Prob. 1RQCh. 17 - Prob. 2RQCh. 17 - Prob. 3RQCh. 17 - Prob. 4RQCh. 17 - Prob. 5RQCh. 17 - Prob. 6RQCh. 17 - Prob. 7RQCh. 17 - Prob. 8RQCh. 17 - Prob. 9RQCh. 17 - Prob. 10RQCh. 17 - Prob. 17.1PCh. 17 - Prob. 17.2PCh. 17 - Prob. 17.3PCh. 17 - Prob. 17.4PCh. 17 - Prob. 17.5PCh. 17 - Prob. 17.6PCh. 17 - Prob. 17.7PCh. 17 - Prob. 17.8PCh. 17 - Prob. 17.9PCh. 17 - Prob. 17.10P
Knowledge Booster
Similar questions
- CENGAGE MINDTAP News Analysis: Go for the Video Bonus While spending the weekend in New York City, Andrew, Beth, and their son, Darnell, are lucky enough to hail the Cash Cab for their taxi ride. During their ride, they win $100 for correct answers and receive only one strike for a wrong answer, so at the end of the ride they are eligible for the video bonus question. Their vacation budget before entering the cab was $400, and based on their understanding of the type of bonus question they'll be asked, they believe they have a 70% chance of getting the question right. As explained in the article, if they answer the video bonus question correctly, they will double their winnings, but if they miss the video bonus question, they will lose all of what they had previously won. Alternatively, they can choose not to play for the bonus and walk away with their winnings from the cab ride. The following graph shows the cab riders' utility as a function of their total vacation budget. For…arrow_forwardConsider a normal form game in which player 1 has two strategies, A1,B1 and player 2 has two strategies, A2,B2. Suppose that A1 is a best response to A2 and A2 is a best response to A1. Do we know whether A1 is rationalizable?arrow_forwardDavid wants to auction a painting, and there are two potential buyers. The value for eachbuyer is either 0 or 10, each value equally likely. Suppose he offers to sell the object for $6, and the two buyers simultaneously accept or reject. If exactly one buyer accepts, the object sold to that person for $6. If both accept, the object is allocated randomly to the buyers, also for $6. If neither accepts, the object is allocated randomly to the bidders for $0. (a) Identify the type space and strategy space for each buyer. (b) Show that there is an equilibrium in which buyers with value 10 always accept. (c) Show that there is an equilibrium in which buyers with value 10 always reject.arrow_forward
- Consider a normal form game in which player 1 has three strategies, A1, B1, C1 and player 2 has three strategies, A2, B2, C2. Suppose that A1 is a best response to B2, B1 is a best response to A2, A2 is a best response to B1, and B2 is a best response to A1. Do we know with certainty whether A1 is rationalizable or not?arrow_forwardTwo friends are deciding where to go for dinner. There are three choices, which we label A, B, and C. Max prefers A to B to C. Sally prefers B to A to C. To decide which restaurant to go to, the friends adopt the following procedure: First, Max eliminates one of three choices. Then, Sally decides among the two remaining choices. Thus, Max has three strategies (eliminate A, eliminate B, and eliminate C). For each of those strategies, Sally has two choices (choose among the two remaining). a.Write down the extensive form (game tree) to represent this game. b.If Max acts non-strategically, and makes a decision in the first period to eliminate his least desirable choice, what will the final decision be? c.What is the subgame-perfect equilibrium of the above game? d. Does your answer in b. differ from your answer in c.? Explain why or why not. Only typed Answerarrow_forwardSuppose there are two players playing a game with east or west and south and nerth ways. Find the expected Nash equilibrium by using the concept of probabilities. Player X Left[L) Right|R) Player Y Up(U) (5,6) (0,8) (4,6) Down[D) (0,9)arrow_forward
- You are considering two options for your next family vacation. You can visit Disney World or Chicago. Your utility from Disney World is 100 if the weather is clear, and 0 if it rains. Chicago is worth a utility of 70 if the weather is clear and a utility of 40 if the weather is rainy. Also assume that the chance of rain at Disney World is going to be 50% and the chance of rain in Chicago is 40%. As a utility maximizer, should you plan to go to Disney World or Chicago? (Explain using relevant equations)arrow_forwardSuppose Jessica has two choices: receive $12000 and 30 utils or take a gamble that has a 55% chance of a $20000 and 45 utils, and a 45% chance of a $0 payoff and zero utility. Assuming Jessica is a utility maximizer, what will she likely choose? a) Jessica will not take the gamble b) Jessica will take the gamble c) It cannot be determined d) Jessica is indifferentarrow_forwardRecall inequality aversion model to explain social preference: There are two players, A & B. They decide how to divide $100 between two. Player A first proposes a distribution of ($xA, $xB) with XA2Ó, XB20, and xA + xB = 100, and then Player B decides whether to accept it. Players' payoff functions are given as follows: For player i, where x-i represents the opponent of the player i, a is a parameter and max{C, D} with numbers C, & D is an operator to pick up the greater value between C and D. 4. Recall inequality aversion model to explain social preference: There are two players, A & B. They decide how to divide $100 between two. Player A first proposes a distribution of ($ra, $xx) with x420, XB20, and x4+ xB=100, and then Player B decides whether to accept it. Players' payoff functions are given as follows: For player i, u;(Ti, X=i) = x; – max{x_i – t;, 0} – a max{x; – x-i, 0} where x, represents the opponent of the player i, a is a parameter and max{C, D} with numbers C, & D is an…arrow_forward
- There are three players who must each choose an “effort” level from 1 to 7, that is, Si = {1, 2, 3, ..., 7}. The payoff for each player i is ui(si, s−i) = 10 max{s1, s2, s3} − si. How many pure- strategy Nash equilibria are there? Select one: a.2 b.4 c.none of the other answers d.3 e.1arrow_forwardWithin 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_forwardThe deciding shot in a soccer game comes down to a penalty shot. If the goal-keeper jumps in one corner and the player shots the ball in the other, then it is a goal. If the goalie jumps left and the player shoots left, then it is a goal with probability 1/3. If the goalie jumps right and the player shots right, it is goal with probability 2/3. If both players play Nash strategies, what is the expected value of goals that will follow from this penalty shot. 1/9 2/9 3/9 4/9 5/9 6/9 O7/9arrow_forward
arrow_back_ios
SEE MORE QUESTIONS
arrow_forward_ios
Recommended textbooks for you
Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving ApproachEconomicsISBN:9781337106665Author:Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike ShorPublisher: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