EBK INTERMEDIATE MICROECONOMICS AND ITS
12th Edition
ISBN: 9781305176386
Author: Snyder
Publisher: YUZU
expand_more
expand_more
format_list_bulleted
Question
Chapter 17.3, Problem 1.1MQ
To determine
Choosing of B or D in Kahneman and Tversky scenarios
Expert Solution & Answer
Want to see the full answer?
Check out a sample textbook solution
Students have asked these similar questions
Consider the game of Chicken in which each player has the option to “get out of the way” and “hang tough” with payoffs:
Get out of the way
Hang tough
Get out of the way
2,2
1,3
Hang tough
3,1
00
a. Find all pure strategy Nash equilibria, if they exist
b. Let k be the probability that player 1 chooses “hang tough” and u be the probability that player two chooses “hang tough.” Find the mixed stragety Nash equilibria, if they exist
Consider the following game
1\2
Y
Z
A
10,3
3,9
B
8,5
6,1
Suppose Player 2 holds the following belief about Player 1: θ1 (A,B) = (9/10,1/10)
What is the expected payoff from playing ‘Y’ ?
What is the expected payoff from playing ‘Z’ ?
Based on these beliefs, player 2 should respond by playing _____
Let b(p,s,t) be the bet that pays out s with probability p and t with probability 1−p.
We make the three following statements:
S1: The CME for b is the value m such that u(m)=E[u(b(p,s,t))].
S2: A risk averse attitude corresponds to the case CME smaller than E[b(p,s,t))].
S3: A risk seeking attitude corresponds to a convex utility function.
Are these statements true or false?
Chapter 17 Solutions
EBK INTERMEDIATE MICROECONOMICS AND ITS
Ch. 17.3 - Prob. 1MQCh. 17.3 - Prob. 2MQCh. 17.3 - Prob. 1.1MQCh. 17.3 - Prob. 1.2MQCh. 17.3 - Prob. 2.2MQCh. 17.3 - Prob. 1.3MQCh. 17.3 - Prob. 1TTACh. 17.3 - Prob. 2TTACh. 17.4 - Prob. 1TTACh. 17.4 - Prob. 2TTA
Ch. 17.4 - Prob. 1.1TTACh. 17.4 - Prob. 2.1TTACh. 17.4 - Prob. 1MQCh. 17.4 - Prob. 1.2TTACh. 17.4 - Prob. 2.2TTACh. 17.5 - Prob. 1MQCh. 17.5 - Prob. 2MQCh. 17.6 - Prob. 1TTACh. 17.6 - Prob. 2TTACh. 17 - Prob. 1RQCh. 17 - Prob. 2RQCh. 17 - Prob. 3RQCh. 17 - Prob. 4RQCh. 17 - Prob. 5RQCh. 17 - Prob. 6RQCh. 17 - Prob. 7RQCh. 17 - Prob. 8RQCh. 17 - Prob. 9RQCh. 17 - Prob. 10RQCh. 17 - Prob. 17.1PCh. 17 - Prob. 17.2PCh. 17 - Prob. 17.3PCh. 17 - Prob. 17.4PCh. 17 - Prob. 17.5PCh. 17 - Prob. 17.6PCh. 17 - Prob. 17.7PCh. 17 - Prob. 17.8PCh. 17 - Prob. 17.9PCh. 17 - Prob. 17.10P
Knowledge Booster
Similar questions
- Consider the two Nash equilibria found above. Is any one of them a Perfect Bayesian Equilibrium (PBE)? Explain. In particular, consider each NE and argue why they are or are not part of a PBE. [Note: A complete description of PBE must specify beliefs as a part of description of the equilibrium.]arrow_forwardConsider the following Bayesian game. There are two players 1 and 2. Both players choose whether to play A or B. Two states are possible, L and R. In the former, players play a stag-hunt game, and in the latter, players play a matching pennies game. Suppose that Player 2 knows the state, while Player 1 thinks that the state is L with probability q and R with probability 1 ! q. Payo§s in each state respectively satisfy: Player 1 is the row player, and their payo§ is the first to appear in each entry. Player 2 is thecolumn player and their payo§ is the second to appear in each entry. (a) What is the set of possible strategies for the two players in this game? (b) Find all the pure strategy Bayes Nash equilibria for any value of q 2 (0, 1).arrow_forwardThe mixed stratergy nash equalibrium consists of : the probability of firm A selecting October is 0.692 and probability of firm A selecting December is 0.309. The probability of firm B selecting October is 0.5 and probability of firm selecting December is 0.5. In the equilibrium you calculated above, what is the probability that both consoles are released in October? In December? What are the expected payoffs of firm A and of firm B in equilibrium?arrow_forward
- Matthew is playing snooker (more difficult variant of pool) with his friend. He is not sure which strategy to choose for his next shot. He can try and pot a relatively difficult red ball (strategy R1), which he will pot with probability 0.4. If he pots it, he will have to play the black ball, which he will pot with probability 0.3. His second option (strategy R2) is to try and pot a relatively easy red, which he will pot with probability 0.7. If he pots it, he will have to play the blue ball, which he will pot with probability 0.6. His third option, (strategy R3) is to play safe, meaning not trying to pot any ball and give a difficult shot for his opponent to then make a foul, which will give Matthew 4 points with probability 0.5. If potted, the red balls are worth 1 point each, while the blue ball is worth 5 points, and the black ball 7 points. If he does not pot any ball, he gets 0 point. By using the EMV rule, which strategy should Matthew choose? And what is his expected…arrow_forwardSuppose that you have two opportunities to invest $1M. The first will increase the amount invested by 50% with a probability of 0.6 or decrease it with a probability of 0.4. The second will increase it by 5% for certain. You wish to split the $1M between the two opportunities. Let x be the amount invested in the first opportunity with (1-x) invested in the second. Find the optimal value of x. Using expected value as the criterion (linear utility) Using the flowing utility function: u(x)=2.3 ln〖(1+4.5x)arrow_forwardEach of the two players independently (and simultaneously with the other) decides whether to go to a play or a concert. Each would rather go with the other to a concert than with them to a play, but prefers this to not being together, in which case they don't care where they go alone. Additionally, each is indifferent between attending the play together and participating in a lottery where both go to the concert with a probability of ¾ and to different events with a probability of ¼. Describe the game in matrix form and find all its equilibria under the assumption that the players have von Neumann-Morgenstern preferences.arrow_forward
- Given the stage game above/below. Suppose that the players play (C,C) in period t = 1; 3; 5; ::: and plays (D,D) in period t = 2; 4; 6; ::. Compute the discounted payoff of each player.arrow_forwardConsider the following claim: “If a decision maker prefers one given lottery that yields $x with probability 1 over another given lottery whose expected return is $x, then we can fully characterize the agent's risk attitude. That is, this information comparing two given lotteries is enough to determine if the decision maker is risk averse, risk loving or risk neutral.” If this claim is TRUE, then provide a proof. If it is FALSE, then prove your argument by providing an explanation.arrow_forwardConsider the following 3×3 two player normal form game that is being repeated infinite number of times. The discounting factor for player 1 is δ1 and the discounting factor for player 2 is δ2. left center right up (10 ,40) (32 ,75) (65 ,58) middle (55 ,63) (21 ,45) (23 ,83) down (14 ,76) (16 ,65) (37 ,42) a. Find the total discounted utility for player 2 if player 1 decides to play middle all the time and player 2 decides to play left all the time. b. Now suppose both players are following the strategy of part (a) until player 1 decides to play up in the 6th stage. The the new NE after the 6th stage is (up,right). Find the total discounted utility for player 2 in this case. c. Using the grim trigger strategy, find the minimum value of δ2. Can you find any anomaly in your calculated value of δ2?arrow_forward
- Consider the charity auction. In many charity auctions, altruistic celebrities auction objects with special value for their fans to raise funds for charity. Madonna, for example, held an auction to sell clothing worn during her career and raised about 3.2 million dollars. In the charity auction the winner of the lot is the highest bidder. The difference with the standard auction is that all bidders are required to pay an amount equal to what they bid. Suppose there are two bidders and assume bidders have valuations randomly drawn from the interval [2, 4] according to the uniform distribution. 1. Derive the equilibrium bidding function. Hint: After getting the differential equation given by the FOC, propose a non-linear bidding function b(v) = α + βv2 as solution. Your task is to find α and β. 2. Derive the revenue of the seller in the charity auction. 3. Would the seller obtain higher profits if she organized a first-price sealed bid auction instead? A. Yes, higher revenue B. No, lower…arrow_forwardFind all Nash equilibria for the player 1 and player 2 of the following game with vNM preferences:arrow_forwardIn 'the dictator' game, one player (the dictator) chooses how to divide a pot of $10 between herself and another player (the recipient). The recipient does not have an opportunity to reject the proposed distribution. As such, if the dictator only cares about how much money she makes, she should keep all $10 for herself and give the recipient nothing. However, when economists conduct experiments with the dictator game, they find that dictators often offer strictly positive amounts to the recipients. Are dictators behaving irrationally in these experiments? Whether you think they are or not, your response should try to provide an explanation for the behavior.arrow_forward
arrow_back_ios
SEE MORE QUESTIONS
arrow_forward_ios
Recommended textbooks for you
Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving ApproachEconomicsISBN:9781337106665Author:Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike ShorPublisher:Cengage Learning
Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving Approach
Economics
ISBN:9781337106665
Author:Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike Shor
Publisher:Cengage Learning