In the incomplete information version of the Game of Chicken (see Tadelis 2013, Section 12.2.1), players 1 and 2 drive toward eachother and just before impact they simultaneously decide whether to swerve to the right or continue driving head-on. If both playchicken, each gets a payoff of 0. If i continues to drive while j i plays chicken, then i get a payoff of 8 and j gets a payoff of 0.Finally, if both continue to drive head-on, then each gets 4 – k, where k represents the cost to each player. k could be, with equalprobability, either high or low. While the distribution of type is common knowledge, none of the two players knows whether the cost tothe other player is high or low.1. Denoting the high cost with H and the low cost with L, draw the extensive form of the game.2. Assuming H= 16 and L = 0, derive from the extensive form the normal form, and find the unique pure-strategy Bayesian Nashequilibrium.1. The Game of Chicken is not played just between teenagers in films; it is relevant whenever optimal behaviour depends onsome combination of each player's tendency to be aggressive and his belief about his opponent's tendency to beaggressive.

Chicken Game : Two Players : Player 1 & Player 2 Two strategies to choose : (Straight ) ,…

Answered: In the incomplete information version…

Microeconomic Theory

12th Edition

ISBN:9781337517942

Author:NICHOLSON

Publisher:NICHOLSON

Chapter15: Imperfect Competition

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 15.7P

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

In the game shown below, Players 1 and 2 are competing over how to divide up $100. Each player must move at the same time without knowledge of the other player’s move. The table shows the payoff for Player1 (Player 2’s payoff is $100 Player 1’s Payoff). Find the Nash equilibrium(s) for this game. That is, what strategy should Player 1 and Player 2 use for this game? If the Players use their optimal strategy, what will be the payoff for each player in this game? Player 2 Player 1 Left Middle Right Up 40 30 50 Middle 20 50 40 Down 30 20 30
Suppose two players play a two-period repeated game, where the stage game is the normal-form game shown below. Is there a subgame perfect Nash equilibrium in which the players select (A, X) in the first period? If so, fully describe such equilibrium. If not, explain why not. Player 1 has choice A, B; Player 2 has choice X, Y, Z. Payoff: (A,X)-(5,7), (A,Y)-(2,4), (A,Z)-(3,8), (B,X)-(1,4), (B,Y)-(3,5), (B,Z)-(1,4)
Suppose Carlos and Deborah are playing a game in which both must simultaneously choose the action Left or Right. The payoff matrix that follows shows the payoff each person will earn as a function of both of their choices. For example, the lower-right cell shows that if Carlos chooses Right and Deborah chooses Right, Carlos will receive a payoff of 7 and Deborah will receive a payoff of 6. The only dominant strategy in this game is for ____ to choose ____ . The outcome reflecting the unique Nash equilibrium in this game is as follows: Carlos chooses ____ and Deborah chooses ____ .
Consider the following game. There are two payers, Player 1 and Player 2. Player 1 chooses a row (10, 20, or 30), and Player 2 chooses a column (10/20/30). Payoffs are in the cells of the table, with those on the left going to Player 1 and those on the right going to player 2. For example, a payoff 100/200 would mean Player 1 receives 100 and Player 2 receives 200.What is [are] the Nash Equilibrium [Equilibria] of this game?A) (10/10) and (20/20)B) (30/30)C) (10/20) and (20/10)D) (20/20)E) (30/30)
Suppose Carlos and Deborah are playing a game in which both must simultaneously choose the action Left or Right. The payoff matrix that follows shows the payoff each person will earn as a function of both of their choices. For example, the lower-right cell shows that if Carlos chooses Right and Deborah chooses Right, Carlos will receive a payoff of 6 and Deborah will receive a payoff of 5. Deborah Left Right Carlos Left 8, 4 4, 5 Right 5, 4 6, 5 The only dominant strategy in this game is for to choose . The outcome reflecting the unique Nash equilibrium in this game is as follows: Carlos chooses and Deborah chooses .
Solving for dominant strategies and the Nash equilibrium Suppose Felix and Janet are playing a game in which both must simultaneously choose the action Left or Right. The payoff matrix that follows shows the payoff each person will earn as a function of both of their choices. For example, the lower-right cell shows that if Felix chooses Right and Janet chooses Right, Felix will receive a payoff of 3 and Janet will receive a payoff of 7. Attached the table The only dominant strategy in this game is for (Janet / Felix) to choose (Left / Right). The outcome reflecting the unique Nash equilibrium in this game is as follows: Felix chooses (Left / Right) and Janet chooses (Left / Right).
In the game shown below, Player 1 can move Up or Down, and Player 2 can move Left or Right. The players must move at the same time without knowledge of the other player’s move. The first payoff is for the row player (Player 1) and the second payoff is for the column player (Player 2). Solve each game using game theoretic logic. Player 2 Player 1 Left Right Up 7, 7 2, 9 Down 9, 2 1, 3
In the collusion game, we found that collusion was only sustainable in the infinite horizon repeated game. One Nash Equilbrium of that game can be found when all players play a “grim trigger” strategy, where they collude until an opponent chooses to compete, and then compete for all future rounds as a punishment. In such a game, if the one period bonus that comes from competing is low enough, firms always collude and the punishment is never triggered. However, let’s think a little deeper about this Nash Equilibrium. Is the punishment (vowing to compete forever after one deviates) realistic, especially if firms can communicate freely? Why or why not? (Hint: Is a grim trigger Nash Equilibrium a Subgame Perfect Nash Equilibrium? What kinds of Nash Equilibria does Subgame Perfection rule out in sequential games?)
Three politicians are voting on whether to allow themselves a salary increase of$3,500per a year. If they vote in favor of a raise, then they lose some public support, costing them each$1,500 per year. The salary increase passes if two or more politicians vote in favor of it. What is this game’s Nash equilibrium (or equilibria)? Explain. There is no need to draw a payoff matrix.
Consider the game shown below. In this game, players 1 and 2 must move at the same time without knowledge of the other player’s move. Player 1’s choices are shown in the row headings (A, B, C, D), Player 2’s choices are shown in the column headings (E, F, G). The first payoff is for the row player (Player1) and the second payoff is for the column player (Player 2). Player 2 Player 1 E F G A 2, 7 7, 2 2, 6 B 5, 5 5, 4 8, 4 C 4, 6 8, 4 7, 5 D 1, 6 3, 5 6, 4 Highlight the correct answer: Player 1: Has a dominant strategy to choose A Has a dominant strategy to choose B Has a dominant strategy to choose C Has a dominant strategy to choose D Does not have a dominant strategy Player 2: Has a dominant strategy to choose E Has a dominant strategy to choose F Has a dominant strategy to choose G Does not have a dominant strategy The Nash equilibrium outcome to this game is: A/F B/E B/G C/F C/G There is no pure strategy Nash…
PLAYER B LEFT RIGHT UP 5 FOR A, 30 FOR B 10 FOR A, 12 FOR B PLAYER A DOWN -2 FOR A, 10 FOR B 8 FOR A, 15 FOR B In the above game, the players are seeking to maximize the number they recieve. They choose at the same time. What is the Nash equillibrium? Player A will choose UP and player B will choose LEFT Player A will UP and player B will choose RIGHT Player A will choose DOWN and player B will choose LEFT Player A will choose DOWN and player B will choose RIGHT Player A will choose LEFT and player B will choose UP Player A will choose LEFT and player B will choose DOWN Player A will choose RIGHT and player B will choose UP Player A will choose RIGHT and player B will choose DOWN

Recommended textbooks for you

Microeconomic Theory

Economics

ISBN:

9781337517942

Author:

NICHOLSON

Publisher:

Cengage

Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving Approach

Economics

ISBN:

9781337106665

Author:

Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike Shor

Publisher:

Cengage Learning

Managerial Economics: Applications, Strategies an…

Economics

ISBN:

9781305506381

Author:

James R. McGuigan, R. Charles Moyer, Frederick H.deB. Harris

Publisher:

Cengage Learning

Microeconomic Theory

Economics

ISBN:

9781337517942

Author:

NICHOLSON

Publisher:

Cengage

Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving Approach

Economics

ISBN:

9781337106665

Author:

Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike Shor

Publisher:

Cengage Learning

Managerial Economics: Applications, Strategies an…

Economics

ISBN:

9781305506381

Author:

James R. McGuigan, R. Charles Moyer, Frederick H.deB. Harris

Publisher:

Cengage Learning

Exploring Economics

Economics

ISBN:

9781544336329

Author:

Robert L. Sexton

Publisher:

SAGE Publications, Inc

Microeconomics: Principles & Policy

Economics

ISBN:

9781337794992

Author:

William J. Baumol, Alan S. Blinder, John L. Solow

Publisher:

Cengage Learning

SEE MORE TEXTBOOKS