Testing Models of Strategic Uncertainty: Equilibrium Selection in Repeated Games

Emanuel Vespa, Taylor Weidman and Alistair Wilson

Papers from arXiv.org

Abstract: In repeated-game applications where both the collusive and non-collusive outcomes can be supported as equilibria, researchers must resolve underlying selection questions if theory will be used to understand counterfactual policies. One guide to selection, based on clear theoretical underpinnings, has shown promise in predicting when collusive outcomes will emerge in controlled repeated-game experiments. In this paper we both expand upon and experimentally test this model of selection, and its underlying mechanism: strategic uncertainty. Adding an additional source of strategic uncertainty (the number of players) to the more-standard payoff sources, we stress test the model. Our results affirm the model as a tool for predicting when tacit collusion is likely/unlikely to be successful. Extending the analysis, we corroborate the mechanism of the model. When we remove strategic uncertainty through an explicit coordination device, the model no longer predicts the selected equilibrium.

Date: 2021-01
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-exp and nep-gth
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://arxiv.org/pdf/2101.05900 Latest version (application/pdf)

Related works:
Working Paper: Testing Models of Strategic Uncertainty: Equilibrium Selection in Repeated Games (2024)
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:arx:papers:2101.05900

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Papers from arXiv.org
Bibliographic data for series maintained by arXiv administrators ().