Microeconomics
11th Edition
ISBN: 9781260507140
Author: David C. Colander
Publisher: McGraw Hill Education
expand_more
expand_more
format_list_bulleted
Question
Chapter 20, Problem 5QAP
To determine
The disturbing factor of the movie scene.
Expert Solution & Answer
Want to see the full answer?
Check out a sample textbook solution
Students have asked these similar questions
The primary research finding from studies of the “Ultimatum Game” is that when most people make economic decisions they … (choose one)
-optimize.
-consider the issue of fairness.
-meliorate.
-apply the availability heuristic.
You have just played rock, paper, scissors with your friend. You chose scissors and he chose paper, so you won. Is this a Nash equilibrium? Explain why or why not.
There is a city, which looks like chopped isosceles triangle, as shown below. Citizens live uniformly distributed all over the city. Two ice-cream vendors, A and B, must independently set up stores in the city. Each citizen buys from the vendor closest to their location and when equidistant from both vendors they choose by coin toss. Each vendor’s aim is to maximize the expected number of customers. A choice of location by the two vendors is a Nash equilibrium if no vendor can do better by deviating unilaterally. Does this game have a Nash equilibrium? If so, describe it. If not, explain why not
Chapter 20 Solutions
Microeconomics
Ch. 20.1 - Prob. 1QCh. 20.1 - Prob. 2QCh. 20.1 - Prob. 3QCh. 20.1 - Prob. 4QCh. 20.1 - Prob. 5QCh. 20.1 - Prob. 6QCh. 20.1 - Prob. 7QCh. 20.1 - Prob. 8QCh. 20.1 - Prob. 9QCh. 20.1 - Prob. 10Q
Ch. 20.A - Netflix and Hulu each expects profit to rise by...Ch. 20.A - Prob. 2QECh. 20 - Prob. 1QECh. 20 - Prob. 2QECh. 20 - Prob. 3QECh. 20 - Prob. 4QECh. 20 - Prob. 5QECh. 20 - Prob. 6QECh. 20 - Prob. 7QECh. 20 - Prob. 8QECh. 20 - Prob. 9QECh. 20 - Prob. 10QECh. 20 - Prob. 11QECh. 20 - Prob. 12QECh. 20 - Prob. 13QECh. 20 - Prob. 14QECh. 20 - Prob. 15QECh. 20 - Prob. 16QECh. 20 - Prob. 1QAPCh. 20 - Prob. 2QAPCh. 20 - Prob. 3QAPCh. 20 - Prob. 4QAPCh. 20 - Prob. 5QAPCh. 20 - Prob. 6QAPCh. 20 - Prob. 1IPCh. 20 - Prob. 2IPCh. 20 - Prob. 3IPCh. 20 - Prob. 4IPCh. 20 - Prob. 5IPCh. 20 - Prob. 6IPCh. 20 - Prob. 7IP
Knowledge Booster
Similar questions
- A Nash Equilibrium is the equilibrium of a game in which; Both players get the largest payoff amount Both players get the best payoff independent of what the other players choices are Both player, with the knowledge of what the other players possible moves are, do not have incentive to deviate from their strategy There is incomplete information of the game and each player makes the move that is best for them and their payoff outcomearrow_forwardSuppose China and the US are deciding whether to join an international agreement to mitigate climate change. The matrix below contains payoffs that represent each country’s net benefit from their decisions. Use this information to answer Question 24. CHINA USA Join Agreement Do Not Join Agreement Join Agreement (100,100) (0,125) Do Not Join Agreement (125,0) (25,25) [24] What does each country decide to do in a Nash equilibrium? AND What is the efficient outcome? Nash: Efficient:arrow_forwardNASH EQUILIBRIUMarrow_forward
- Evolutionary game theory provides a framework for understanding the emergence of preferences and behavior. Why are theoretical methodologies that employ the rational actor model an evolutionary stable strategy for economists?arrow_forwardA special situation that is taken from game theory where two individuals, even though they would benefit from working together, have incentives to act differently is calledarrow_forwardConsider the following game: you and a partner on a school project are asked to evaluate the other, privately rating them either "1 (Good)" or "0 (Bad)". After all the ratings have been done, a bonus pot of $1000 is given to the person with the highest number of points. If there is a tie, the pool is split evenly. Both players only get utility from money. Mark all of the following true statements: A. The best response to your partner rating you as Good is to rate them as Good as well. Your answer B. There is no best response in this game. C. Your partner's best response to you rating them as Bad is to also rate you as C Bad. D. Your best response to any strategy of your partner is to play "Good".arrow_forward
- One of the critical moments early on in the The Lord of the Rings trilogy is the meeting in Rivendell to decide who should take the One Ring to Mordor. Gimli the Dwarf won’t hear of an Elf doing it, whereas Legolas (who is an Elf) feels similarly about Gimli. Boromir (who is a Man) is opposed to either of them taking charge of the Ring. And then there is Frodo the Hobbit, who has the weakest desire to take the Ring but knows that someone must throw it into the fires of Mordor. In modeling this scenario as a game, assume there are four players: Boromir, Frodo, Gimli, and Legolas. (There were more, of course, including Aragorn and Elrond, but let’s keep it simple.) Each of them has a preference ordering, shown in the following table, as to who should take on the task of carrying the One Ring. Of the three non-Hobbits, each prefers to take on the task himself. Each would prefer that other than themselves and Frodo, no one should take the Ring. As for Frodo, he doesn’t really want to do it…arrow_forwardTrue or false? If a game has a Nash equilibrium, that equilibrium will be the equilibrium that we expect to observe in the real world. False. People don’t always act in the way that a Nash equilibrium requires. People don’t always make the necessary calculations and they take into account the outcome of others. False. A Nash equilibrium is based on very strict assumptions that rarely hold in the real world. No real-world situation leads to a Nash equilibrium. True. As long as people are rational and have their own self-interest at heart, real-life games will result in the Nash equilibrium. True. Nash’s theory of equilibrium outcomes was derived from real-world interactions. The theory holds true for almost all real-world scenarios.arrow_forwardThe 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_forward
- **Practice*** Amy and Bob are playing the following board game:(I) Amy starts. She has three possible actions: Pass, Attack, or Defend.(II) Bob observes what Amy chose, and then chooses between three actions with the same names: Pass, Attack, or Defend.(III) If either player passes, or one attacks and the other defends, then the game ends. But if either both players attack, or if both players defend, then Amy has to choose between two actions: Respond or Not Respond. The payoffs are as follows:- If both players pass, both players get a payoff of 0.- If a player attacks and the other player defends, the player that attacks gets a payoff of 1, while the player that defended gets a payoff of 2.- If a player passes but the other player attacks or defends, the player who passes gets a payoff of -1, and the player who attacked or defended gets a payoff of 3.- If both players attack or both players defend:– If Amy responds, she gets a payoff of 4, and Bob gets a payoff of 0.– If Amy does…arrow_forwardTwo roommates John and Joe are playing a simultaneous game of cleaning the apartment. If neither of them clean, the apartment gets filthy and both get a utility of 2. If John cleans and Joe doesn’t, John gets a utility of 1 and Joe gets a utility of 4. If Joe cleans and John doesn’t, Joe gets a utility of 1 and John gets a utility of 4 and if both clean up the apartment, they each get a utility of 3.What is the Nash equilibrium of this game? Group of answer choices Joe cleans, John doesn’t John cleans, Joe doesn’t Both of them clean the apartment Neither of them clean the apartmentarrow_forwardSuppose two players play the prisoners' dilemma game a finite number of times, both players are rational, and the game is played with complete information, is a tit-for-tat strategy optimal in this case? Explain using your own words.arrow_forward
arrow_back_ios
SEE MORE QUESTIONS
arrow_forward_ios
Recommended textbooks for you
Managerial Economics: Applications, Strategies an...EconomicsISBN:9781305506381Author:James R. McGuigan, R. Charles Moyer, Frederick H.deB. HarrisPublisher:Cengage Learning
Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving ApproachEconomicsISBN:9781337106665Author:Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike ShorPublisher:Cengage Learning
Managerial Economics: Applications, Strategies an...
Economics
ISBN:9781305506381
Author:James R. McGuigan, R. Charles Moyer, Frederick H.deB. Harris
Publisher: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