Jane and Bill are apprehended for a bank robbery. They are taken into separate rooms and questioned by the police about their involvement in the crime. The police tell them each that if they confess and turn the other person in, they will receive a lighter sentence. If they both confess, they will be each be sentenced to 30 years. If neither confesses, they will each receive a 20-year sentence. If only one confesses, the confessor will receive 15 years and the one who stayed silent will receive 35 years. Table 10.7 e below represents the choices available to Jane and Bill. A = Confess; B = = Stay Silent. (Each results entry lists Bill's sentence first (in years), and Jane's sentence second). Answer the following: Jane A B A (30, 30) (15, 35) Bill B (35, 15) (20, 20) Table 10.7 a) If Jane trusts Bill to stay silent, what should she do? b) If Jane thinks that Bill will confess, what should she do? c) Does Jane have a dominant strategy? Does Bill have a dominant strategy? Justify your answer.

Jane and Bill are apprehended for a bank robbery. They are taken into separate rooms and questioned by the police about their involvement in the crime. The police tell them each that if they confess and turn the other person in, they will receive a lighter sentence. If they both confess, they will be each be sentenced to 30 years. If neither confesses, they will each receive a 20-year sentence. If only one confesses, the confessor will receive 15 years and the one who stayed silent will receive 35 years. Table 10.7 e below represents the choices available to Jane and Bill. A = Confess; B = = Stay Silent. (Each results entry lists Bill's sentence first (in years), and Jane's sentence second). Answer the following: Jane A B A (30, 30) (15, 35) Bill B (35, 15) (20, 20) Table 10.7 a) If Jane trusts Bill to stay silent, what should she do? b) If Jane thinks that Bill will confess, what should she do? c) Does Jane have a dominant strategy? Does Bill have a dominant strategy? Justify your answer.

Principles of Economics 2e

2nd Edition

ISBN:9781947172364

Author:Steven A. Greenlaw; David Shapiro

Publisher:Steven A. Greenlaw; David Shapiro

Chapter10: Monopolistic Competition And Oligopoly

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 21P: Jane and Bill are apprehended for a bank robbery. They are taken into separate rooms and questioned...

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

Jane and Bill are apprehended for a bank robbery. They are taken into separate rooms and questioned by the police about their involvement in the crime. The police tell them each that if they confess and turn the other person in, they will receive a fighter sentence. If they both confess, they will be each be sentenced to 30 years. If neither confesses, they will each receive a 20-year sentence. If only one confesses, the they will receive 15 years and the one who stayed silent will receive 35 years. Table 10.7 below represents the choices available to Jane and Bill. If Jane trusts Bill to stay silent, what should she do? If Jane thinks that Bill will confess, what should she do? Does Jane have a dominant strategy? Does Bill have a dominant strategy? A = Confess; B = Stay Silent. (Each results entry lists Janes sentence first (in years), and Bills sentence second.)
You and a rival are engaged in a game in which there are three possible outcomes: you win, your rival wins (you lose), or the two of you tie. You get a payoff of 50 if you win, a payoff of 20 if you tie, and a payoff of 0 if you lose. What is your expected payoff in each of the following situations? (a) There is a 50% chance that the game ends in a tie, but only a 10% chance that you win. (There is thus a 40% chance that you lose.) (b) There is a 50–50 chance that you win or lose. There are no ties. (c) There is an 80% chance that you lose, a 10% chance that you win, and a 10% chance that you tie.
6 Two people will select a policy that affects both of them by applying a "veto" in a sequential and alternate manner, that is: person 1 begins to veto a policy and then person 2 exercises his "veto" with the remaining policies; the process repeats until only one policy remains. Assume that there are 3 policies: X,Y,Z, and that person 1 prefers X to Y to Z and person 2 prefers Z to Y to X. a. Represents the game extensively b. Give the number of subgames C. Indicate the total strategies of the players d. find all subgame perfect nash equilibria e. Find all Nash Equilibriums.
Suppose that there are two firms in a market, firm 1 and firm 2. The marketis declining in size. The game starts in period 0, and the firms can compete in periods 0, 1,2, 3, ... (i.e., indefinitely) if they so choose. Duopoly profits in period t for firm 1 are equalto 105 −10t, and they are 10.5 −t for firm 2. Monopoly profits (those if a firm is the onlyone left in the market) are 510 −25t for firm 1 and 51 −2t for firm 2. At the start of eachperiod, each firm must decide either to “stay in” or “exit” if it is still active (they do sosimultaneously if both are still active). Once a firm exits, it is out of the market forever andearns zero in each period thereafter. Firms maximize their (undiscounted) sum of profits.What is this game’s subgame perfect Nash equilibrium?
Consider the following ‘war of attrition’. Two animals are in a stand off for a prey. Theyindependently decide when to give up. Waiting is costly, but the animal giving up last winsthe prey (they each get nothing if they walk away at the exact same time). Getting the preygives a benefit of 80 while waiting costs 2 per unit of time. Formally payoffs are given asfollows:u1(t1, t2) =(−2t1 if t1 ≤ t280 − 2t2 if t1 > t2u2(t1, t2) =(80 − 2t1 if t1 < t2−2t2 if t1 ≥ t2,where ti is the amount of time animal i decided to wait. Assuming that animals aim tomaximize payoffs (consciously or not), figure out the Nash equilibria of this game by answeringthe following questions (similar to how we proceeded to solve the Bertrand game).(a) Show that there is no Nash equilibrium where both animals wait a strictly positiveamount of time. For this, consider two subcases: (i) both wait the same amount oftime, or (ii) one gives in earlier than the other.(b) Assume now that one animal, say the first one,…
Consider the following coordination game: Player 2P1 Comedy Show Concert Comedy Show 11,5 0,0 Concert 0,0 2,2 a. Find the Nash equilibrium(s) for this game.b. Now assume Player 1 and Player 2 have distributional preferences. Specifically, both people greatly care about the utility of the other person. In fact, they place equal weight on their outcome and the other person’soutcome, ρ = σ = ½. Find the Nash equilibrium(s) with these utilitarianpreferences.c. Now consider the case where Player1 and Player2 do not like each other. Specifically, any positive outcome for the other person is viewed as anegative outcome for the individual, ρ = σ = -1. Find the Nashequilibrium(s) with these envious preferences.
Suppose O2 and Vodafone are the only two telecommunicationscompanies in UK. Both companies are considering whether ornot to stop offering unlimited data plans. Each company has twostrategies: stop or don’t stop. The first entry in the brackets is the payoffsof O2 and the second entry is the payoffs of Vodafone, both in $million.What will be the dominant strategies of O2 and Vodafone and what willbe the Nash equilibrium? Explain your answers.
Someone at a party pulls out a $100 bill and announces that he is going to auction it off. There are n=10 people at the partywho are potential bidders. The owner of the $100 bill puts forth the following procedure: All bidders simultaneously submit a written bid. Only the highest bidders pay their bid (assuming that the highest bid is positive). If m people submit the highest bid, then each receives 1/m of the $100. Each person’s strategy set is {0,1,2,...,1000}{0,1,2,...,1000} so bidding can go as high as $1,000. The payoff of a player bidding bi is:0 if bi < max{b1,b2,…,bn},and 100/m − bi if bi = max {b1,b2,…,bn}where,m is the number of bidders whose bid equals max{b1,...,bn}. How many pure-strategy Nash equilibria does this game have? 1) 0 2) 1 3) 4 4) More than 4.
Splitting Pizza: You and a friend are in an Italian restaurant, and the owner offers both of you a free eight-slice pizza under the following condition. Each of you must simultaneously announce how many slices you would like; that is, each player i ∈ 1, 2 names his desired amount of pizza, 0 ≤ si ≤ 8. If s1 + s2 ≤ 8 then the players get their demands (and the owner eats any leftover slices). If s1 + s2 > 8, then the players get nothing. Assume that you each care only about how much pizza you individually consume, and the more the better.What outcomes can be supported as pure-strategy Nash equilibria?
We’ll now show how a college degree can get you a better job even if itdoesn’t make you a better worker. Consider a two-player game between aprospective employee, whom we’ll refer to as the applicant, and an employer. The applicant’s type is her intellect, which may be low, moderate,or high, with probability 1/3 , 1/2 , and 1/6 , respectively. After the applicantlearns her type, she decides whether or not to go to college. The personalcost in gaining a college degree is higher when the applicant is less intelligent, because a less smart student has to work harder if she is to graduate. Assume that the cost of gaining a college degree is 2, 4, and 6 for an applicant who is of high, moderate, and low intelligence, respectively.The employer decides whether to offer the applicant a job as a manageror as a clerk. The applicant’s payoff to being hired as a manager is 15,while the payoff to being a clerk is 10. These payoffs are independent ofthe applicant’s type. The employer’s payoff from…
1. What are the advantages and disadvantages of collusion? Define Collusion 2. In a Stackelberg game, what is the best response that follower firm 2 can make to the choice y1 already made by the leader, firm 1? Defining the game and provide an example of the best response.
Define the prisoner’s dilemma game. The prisoner’s dilemma game is a: two-person noncooperative sequential game that demonstrates the difficulty of cooperative behavior in certain circumstances. two-person cooperative simultaneous game that demonstrates the difficulty of cooperative behavior in certain circumstances. two-person noncooperative simultaneous game that demonstrates the difficulty of cooperative behavior in certain circumstances. two-person cooperative sequential game that demonstrates the difficulty of cooperative behavior in certain circumstances. a. What assumptions lead to the dilemma? If the prisoners confess, each would get a light sentence. But each prisoner is interrogated separately and is offered the chance to go free if he or she confesses to the crime and agrees to serve as a witness against the other prisoner. This creates the incentive for both prisoners to not confess. If the prisoners do not confess, each would get a…