IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jetheo/v159y2015ipap516-530.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Skill, complexity, and strategic interaction

Author

Listed:
  • Lambson, Val
  • van den Berghe, John

Abstract

We present a win-loss game between players with explicitly-modeled cognitive limitations. Differences in the players' abilities to analyze the available moves induce preferences over the complexity of the environment and hence incentives to manipulate that complexity. Other things equal, higher-skill players are more likely to win. In a class of long-horizon games with constant complexity, greater complexity reduces the advantage of the higher-skill player when the higher-skill player is the last mover. When the lower-skill player moves last, increasing complexity induces countervailing effects, either of which may dominate. Finally, when complexity can be manipulated over the course of the game, the benefits of strategic manipulation of complexity can override objective considerations about best move choice, resulting in purposeful departures from subgame perfect Nash equilibrium behavior.

Suggested Citation

  • Lambson, Val & van den Berghe, John, 2015. "Skill, complexity, and strategic interaction," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 159(PA), pages 516-530.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jetheo:v:159:y:2015:i:pa:p:516-530
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jet.2015.07.014
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022053115001374
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jet.2015.07.014?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jehiel, Philippe & Samet, Dov, 2005. "Learning to play games in extensive form by valuation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 124(2), pages 129-148, October.
    2. Barton L. Lipman, 1995. "Information Processing and Bounded Rationality: A Survey," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 28(1), pages 42-67, February.
    3. Paola Manzini & Marco Mariotti, 2007. "Sequentially Rationalizable Choice," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(5), pages 1824-1839, December.
    4. , & ,, 2007. "Valuation equilibrium," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 2(2), June.
    5. Fudenberg, Drew & Levine, David K, 1993. "Self-Confirming Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(3), pages 523-545, May.
    6. Lambson, Val E. & Probst, Daniel A., 2004. "Learning by matching patterns," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 398-409, February.
    7. McKelvey Richard D. & Palfrey Thomas R., 1995. "Quantal Response Equilibria for Normal Form Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 6-38, July.
    8. Lambson, Val Eugene, 1998. "Skill, complexity and strategic behavior," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 357-369, April.
    9. Abreu, Dilip & Rubinstein, Ariel, 1988. "The Structure of Nash Equilibrium in Repeated Games with Finite Automata," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 56(6), pages 1259-1281, November.
    10. Heiner, Ronald A, 1983. "The Origin of Predictable Behavior," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(4), pages 560-595, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Philippe Jehiel, 2022. "Analogy-Based Expectation Equilibrium and Related Concepts:Theory, Applications, and Beyond," Working Papers halshs-03735680, HAL.
    2. Jehiel, Philippe & Singh, Juni, 2021. "Multi-state choices with aggregate feedback on unfamiliar alternatives," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 1-24.
    3. Drew Fudenberg & David K. Levine, 2006. "Superstition and Rational Learning," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(3), pages 630-651, June.
    4. Mengel, Friederike, 2012. "Learning across games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 74(2), pages 601-619.
    5. Norman, Thomas W.L., 2023. "Pigouvian algorithmic platform design," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 322-332.
    6. Jehiel, Philippe, 1998. "Learning to Play Limited Forecast Equilibria," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 274-298, February.
    7. Sylvain Chassang & Christian Zehnder, 2019. "Secure Survey Design in Organizations: Theory and Experiments," Working Papers 2019-22, Princeton University. Economics Department..
    8. Jehiel, Philippe, 2005. "Analogy-based expectation equilibrium," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 123(2), pages 81-104, August.
    9. Christos A. Ioannou & Julian Romero, 2012. "Strategic Learning With Finite Automata Via The EWA-Lite Model," Purdue University Economics Working Papers 1269, Purdue University, Department of Economics.
    10. Vincent P. Crawford & Nagore Iriberri, 2007. "Level-k Auctions: Can a Nonequilibrium Model of Strategic Thinking Explain the Winner's Curse and Overbidding in Private-Value Auctions?," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 75(6), pages 1721-1770, November.
    11. Conlisk, John, 1996. "Bounded rationality and market fluctuations," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 233-250, March.
    12. Naoki Funai, 2019. "Convergence results on stochastic adaptive learning," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 68(4), pages 907-934, November.
    13. Stefano Ficco & Vladimir Karamychev, 2009. "Preference for flexibility in the absence of learning: the risk attitude effect," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 40(3), pages 405-426, September.
    14. Spiegler, Ran, 2005. "Testing threats in repeated games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 121(2), pages 214-235, April.
    15. Miller, John H., 1996. "The coevolution of automata in the repeated Prisoner's Dilemma," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 87-112, January.
    16. Markus Pasche, 2001. "Equilibrium Concepts for Boundedly Rational Behavior in Games," Working Paper Series B 2001-03, Friedrich Schiller University of Jena, School of of Economics and Business Administration.
    17. Lupia, Arthur & Levine, Adam Seth & Zharinova, Natasha, 2010. "When Should Political Scientists Use the Self-Confirming Equilibrium Concept? Benefits, Costs, and an Application to Jury Theorems," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(1), pages 103-123, January.
    18. Ignacio Esponda & Demian Pouzo, 2015. "Equilibrium in Misspecified Markov Decision Processes," Papers 1502.06901, arXiv.org, revised May 2016.
    19. Heller, Yuval, 2012. "Justifiable choice," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 375-390.
    20. Jehiel, Philippe & Samet, Dov, 2005. "Learning to play games in extensive form by valuation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 124(2), pages 129-148, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Bounded rationality; Complexity; Skill;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L7 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Primary Products and Construction

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jetheo:v:159:y:2015:i:pa:p:516-530. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/622869 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.