When are mixed equilibria relevant?

Daniel Friedman and Shuchen Zhao

Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 2021, vol. 191, issue C, 51-65

Abstract: Mixed strategy equilibria — Nash (NE) and maximin (MM) — are cornerstones of game theory, but their empirical relevance has always been questionable. We study in the laboratory two games, each with a unique NE and a unique (and distinct) MM in completely mixed strategies. Treatment variables include the matching protocol (pairwise random vs population mean matching), whether time is discrete or continuous, and whether players can specify explicit mixtures or only pure strategy realizations. NE mixes predict observed behavior relatively well in population mean matching treatments, and predict better than MM in all treatments. However, in most random pairwise treatments, uniform mixes predict better than NE. Regret-based and sign preserving dynamics capture regularities across all treatments.

Keywords: Nash equilibrium; Maximin; Mixed strategy; Sign preserving dynamics; Laboratory experiment (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: C72 C73 C92 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167268121003735
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:jeborg:v:191:y:2021:i:c:p:51-65

DOI: 10.1016/j.jebo.2021.08.031

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization is currently edited by Houser, D. and Puzzello, D.

More articles in Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().