Joint beliefs in conflictual coordination games

Theory and Decision 42 (3):287-310 (1997)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The traditional solution concept for noncooperative game theory is the Nash equilibrium, which contains an implicit assumption that players’ probability distributions satisfy t probabilistic independence. However, in games with more than two players, relaxing this assumption results in a more general equilibrium concept based on joint beliefs. This article explores the implications of this joint-beliefs equilibrium concept for two kinds of conflictual coordination games: crisis bargaining and public goods provision. We find that, using updating consistent with Bayes’ rule, players’ beliefs converge to equilibria in joint beliefs which do not satisfy probabilistic independence. In addition, joint beliefs greatly expand the set of mixed equilibria. On the face of it, allowing for joint beliefs might be expected to increase the prospects for coordination. However, we show that if players use joint beliefs, which may be more likely as the number of players increases, then the prospects for coordination in these games declines vis-à-vis independent beliefs.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,873

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Forward induction in games with an outside option.Gonzalo Olcina - 1997 - Theory and Decision 42 (2):177-192.
Common Knowledge and Games with Perfect Information.Philip J. Reny - 1988 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1988:363 - 369.
Group beliefs.Raimo Tuomela - 1992 - Synthese 91 (3):285-318.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-09-02

Downloads
62 (#265,636)

6 months
3 (#1,037,180)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Peter Vanderschraaf
University of California, Merced

Citations of this work

Game theory and ethics.Bruno Verbeek - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Rationality and Coordination.Cristina Bicchieri - 1996 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 47 (4):627-629.

Add more references