EBK MICROECONOMICS
2nd Edition
ISBN: 9780134524931
Author: List
Publisher: YUZU
expand_more
expand_more
format_list_bulleted
Question
Chapter 18, Problem 2P
To determine
Interpretation of an ultimatum game where the responder ends up negotiating for more or equal to half the share of money with the proposer.
Expert Solution & Answer
Want to see the full answer?
Check out a sample textbook solution
Students have asked these similar questions
Two players play the Ultimatum Game, in which they are to split $20. A purely rational agent would only reject an offer of …
Group of answer choices...
-$20
-$19
-$1
-$0
-$10
Evaluate the following statement. “We shouldn’t generalize from what people do in the ultimatum game because $10 is a trivial amount of money. When larger amounts of money are on the line, people will act differently.”
Two players play the Ultimatum Game, in which they are to split $20. A purely rational agent would only reject an offer of …
Knowledge Booster
Similar questions
- Suppose Justine and Sarah are playing the ultimatum game. Justine is the proposer, has $140 to allocate, and Sarah can accept or reject the offer. Based on repeated experiments of the ultimatum game, what combination of payouts to Justine and Sarah is most likely to occur?.arrow_forwardWhy might the multiple-play ultimatum game have a different result than the single-play ultimatum game? In the multiple-play ultimatum game, the first player generally offers less money to the second player than in the single-play ultimatum game. The multiple-play ultimatum game leads to a simpler equilibrium: the first player offers exactly half of the total sum to the second player. The multiple-play ultimatum game allows for players to send signals. Therefore, the receiver can punish a player who doesn’t share enough. The multiple-play ultimatum game generally results in less cooperation because both players fall into a back-and-forth pattern of trying to punish the other player.arrow_forwardThe chicken game has often been used to model crises. Recall that in this game, the two players drive straight at each other. They can choose to swerve or keep going straight. If one swerves, and the other goes straight, assume that the one that swerves gets -10 utility and the one that goes straight gets 10 utility, since the one that swerves is deemed the loser. If both swerve, both get 0 utility. If both go straight, they crash and get -50 utility. Assume both players have a discount rate of 0.9 Draw the stage game of date night List all pure strategy Nash equilibria of the single stage game Consider an infinite horizon version of Chicken. Can you get an SPNE in which the both players swerve using a grim trigger type strategy? Consider the following strategies: both players swerve, as long as neither ever went straight. If one player ever plays straight, in all subsequent rounds the player that swerved goes straight and the player that went straight swerves. Can you think…arrow_forward
- The prisoner illustrates that rational, self-interested individuals will natuarally avoid the Nash equilibrium, because it is worse for both of them, true or false and why ?arrow_forwardWe learned that we can use choice between a gamble over someone's best and worst outcomes and getting an outcome of interest (like getting pizza) for certain as a way to assign numeric values to utility (on a scale of 0 to 1). Using this method, if you are indifferent between the following: A gamble that has a 0.3 chance of your best possible outcome (and no lower chance), and a 0.7 chance of your worst possible outcome. Getting pizza for certain. it means that your utility for getting pizza is: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_forward
- 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. Suppose that Player 1 chooses his strategy (10, 20 or 30), first, and subsequently, and after observing Player 1’s choice, Player 2 chooses his own strategy (of 10, 20 or 30). Which of the following statements is true regarding this modified game? I. It is a simultaneous move game, because the timing of moves is irrelevant in classifying games.II. It is a sequential move game, because Player 2 observes Player 1’s choice before he chooses his own strategy.III. This modification gives Player 1 a ‘first mover advantage’. A) I and IIB) II and IIIC) I and IIID) I onlyE) II onlyarrow_forwardSophia is a contestant on a game show and has selected the prize that lies behind door number 3.The show’s host tells her that there is a 50% chance that there is a $15,000 diamond ring behindthe door and a 50% chance that there is a goat behind the door (which is worth nothing to Sophia,who is allergic to goats). Before the door is opened, someone in the audience shouts, “I will giveyou the option of selling me what is behind the door for $8,000 if you will pay me $4,500 for thisoption.” [Assume that the game show allows this offer.]a. If Sophia cares only about the expected dollar values of various outcomes, will she buythis option?b. Explain why Sophia’s degree of risk aversion might affect her willingness to buy thisoptionarrow_forwardTheo and Addy are deciding what toys to pick out at the toy store. Depending on what toys they pick, they can play different games together, but they can’t coordinate their choices. They can’t talk to one another at all until after that make their choice. Below is their payout matrix which shows their utility for each choice. All the bold figures are for Theo and all the non bold figures are for Addy. Addy Strategies Theo Strategies Toy Gas Pump Jump Rope Toy food 20 10 10 3 Ball 7 3 9 4 a) If Theo chooses Toy Food, what would be the possible outcomes for Addy? What would be best for Addy? b) If Addy chose a Toy Gas Pump, what are the possible outcomes for Theo? What would be best for Theo? c) Does Addy have a dominant strategy? If yes, what is her strategy? If not how can you tell? d) Does Theo have a dominant strategy? If yes, what is her strategy? If not how…arrow_forward
- Type out the correct answer ASAP with proper explanation of it In the Ultimatum Game, player 1 is given some money (e.g. $10; this is public knowledge), and may give some or all of this to player 2. In turn, player 2 may accept player 1’s offer, in which case the game is over; or player 2 may reject player 1’s offer, in which case neither player gets any money, and the game is over. a. If you are player 2 and strictly rational, explain why you would accept any positive offer from player 1. b. In reality, many players reject offers from player 1 that are significantly below 50%. Whyarrow_forwardIn the question that follows, n refers to the number of people rather than a fraction of the population. In the land of Pampa, living in the countryside gives you a fixed payoff of 100 (Pampa has lots of land), while living in a city gives you a payoff that first increases with the number of people living in the city (agglomeration), and then declines after the number of people goes above a certain threshold (congestion). Let us write this payoff as r = 20n - n²/2, where n is the number of city dwellers in that particular city. (a) Let N be the total population in Pampa. If only one city can exist in the entire country, trace out the set of equilibria (i.e., population allocations between countryside and city) as N varies from 0 to infinity. (b) Now suppose that new cities can come up, each yielding exactly the same payoff function as above. Focus on the equilibrium in each case with the maximum possible city dwellers, and explain how this equilibrium will move with the overall…arrow_forwardIn Figure 1, if in the status quo we are at point A, which point(s) would pass the Kaldor-Hicks compensation principle? In Figure 1, if in the status quo we are at point A, a movement to which point(s) would pass a unanimous vote? In Figure 1, if in the status quo we are at point A, describe what kind of side payment would be required to move to point D and cause neither Benny nor Gary to be made worse off?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
Economics (MindTap Course List)EconomicsISBN:9781337617383Author:Roger A. ArnoldPublisher: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
Economics (MindTap Course List)
Economics
ISBN:9781337617383
Author:Roger A. Arnold
Publisher:Cengage Learning