IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/econjl/v131y2021i636p1593-1619..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Focality and Asymmetry in Multi-Battle Contests

Author

Listed:
  • Subhasish M Chowdhury
  • Dan Kovenock
  • David Rojo Arjona
  • Nathaniel T Wilcox

Abstract

This article examines the influence of focality in Colonel Blotto games with a lottery contest success function (CSF), where the equilibrium is unique and in pure strategies. We hypothesise that the salience of battlefields affects strategic behaviour (the salient target hypothesis) and present a controlled test of this hypothesis against Nash predictions, checking the robustness of equilibrium play. When the sources of salience come from asymmetries in battlefield values or labels (as in Schelling, 1960), subjects over-allocate the resource to the salient battlefields relative to the Nash prediction. However, the effect is stronger with salient values. In the absence of salience, we find support for the Nash prediction.

Suggested Citation

  • Subhasish M Chowdhury & Dan Kovenock & David Rojo Arjona & Nathaniel T Wilcox, 2021. "Focality and Asymmetry in Multi-Battle Contests," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 131(636), pages 1593-1619.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:econjl:v:131:y:2021:i:636:p:1593-1619.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/ej/ueaa130
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Myerson, Roger B., 1993. "Incentives to Cultivate Favored Minorities Under Alternative Electoral Systems," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 87(4), pages 856-869, December.
    2. Vincent P. Crawford & Uri Gneezy & Yuval Rottenstreich, 2008. "The Power of Focal Points Is Limited: Even Minute Payoff Asymmetry May Yield Large Coordination Failures," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(4), pages 1443-1458, September.
    3. Weinstein Jonathan, 2012. "Two Notes on the Blotto Game," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(1), pages 1-13, March.
    4. Sanjeev Goyal & Adrien Vigier, 2014. "Attack, Defence, and Contagion in Networks," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 81(4), pages 1518-1542.
    5. Brian Roberson & Dmitriy Kvasov, 2012. "The non-constant-sum Colonel Blotto game," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 51(2), pages 397-433, October.
    6. Dan Kovenock & Brian Roberson, 2008. "Electoral Poaching and Party Identification," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 20(3), pages 275-302, July.
    7. Klumpp, Tilman & Polborn, Mattias K., 2006. "Primaries and the New Hampshire Effect," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(6-7), pages 1073-1114, August.
    8. Kvasov, Dmitriy, 2007. "Contests with limited resources," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 136(1), pages 738-748, September.
    9. Maria Montero & Alex Possajennikov & Martin Sefton & Theodore Turocy, 2016. "Majoritarian Blotto contests with asymmetric battlefields: an experiment on apex games," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 61(1), pages 55-89, January.
    10. Subhasish Chowdhury & Dan Kovenock & Roman Sheremeta, 2013. "An experimental investigation of Colonel Blotto games," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 52(3), pages 833-861, April.
    11. Nicholas Bardsley & Judith Mehta & Chris Starmer & Robert Sugden, 2010. "Explaining Focal Points: Cognitive Hierarchy Theory "versus" Team Reasoning," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 120(543), pages 40-79, March.
    12. Paulo Barelli & Srihari Govindan & Robert Wilson, 2014. "Competition for a Majority," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82(1), pages 271-314, January.
    13. David Rietzke & Brian Roberson, 2013. "The robustness of ‘enemy-of-my-enemy-is-my-friend’ alliances," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 40(4), pages 937-956, April.
    14. Steven Levitt & John List & David Reiley, 2010. "What happens in the field stays in the field: Professionals do not play minimax in laboratory experiments," Artefactual Field Experiments 00080, The Field Experiments Website.
    15. Arad, Ayala & Rubinstein, Ariel, 2012. "Multi-dimensional iterative reasoning in action: The case of the Colonel Blotto game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 571-585.
    16. Yosef Rinott & Marco Scarsini & Yaming Yu, 2012. "A Colonel Blotto Gladiator Game," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 37(4), pages 574-590, November.
    17. Lawrence Friedman, 1958. "Game-Theory Models in the Allocation of Advertising Expenditures," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 6(5), pages 699-709, October.
    18. Dan Kovenock & Brian Roberson & Roman M. Sheremeta, 2019. "The attack and defense of weakest-link networks," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 179(3), pages 175-194, June.
    19. Sergiu Hart, 2008. "Discrete Colonel Blotto and General Lotto games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 36(3), pages 441-460, March.
    20. Rafael Hortala-Vallve & Aniol Llorente-Saguer, 2012. "Pure strategy Nash equilibria in non-zero sum colonel Blotto games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 41(2), pages 331-343, May.
    21. Yetkin ÇINAR & Türkmen GÖKSEL, 2012. "An experimental analysis of Colonel Blotto Games under alternative environments," Iktisat Isletme ve Finans, Bilgesel Yayincilik, vol. 27(312), pages 39-57.
    22. McBride, Michael & Hewitt, David, 2013. "The enemy you can’t see: An investigation of the disruption of dark networks," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 32-50.
    23. Russell Golman & Scott Page, 2009. "General Blotto: games of allocative strategic mismatch," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 138(3), pages 279-299, March.
    24. Steven D. Levitt & John A. List & David H. Reiley, 2010. "What Happens in the Field Stays in the Field: Exploring Whether Professionals Play Minimax in Laboratory Experiments," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 78(4), pages 1413-1434, July.
    25. Crutzen, Benoît S.Y. & Sahuguet, Nicolas, 2009. "Redistributive politics with distortionary taxation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(1), pages 264-279, January.
    26. Ignacio Palacios-Huerta & Oscar Volij, 2008. "Experientia Docet: Professionals Play Minimax in Laboratory Experiments," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 76(1), pages 71-115, January.
    27. John Duffy & Alexander Matros, 2013. "Stochastic Asymmetric Blotto Games: Theory and Experimental Evidence," Working Paper 509, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh, revised Nov 2013.
    28. Brian Roberson, 2006. "The Colonel Blotto game," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 29(1), pages 1-24, September.
    29. John Wooders, 2010. "Does Experience Teach? Professionals and Minimax Play in the Lab," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 78(3), pages 1143-1154, May.
    30. Mehta, Judith & Starmer, Chris & Sugden, Robert, 1994. "The Nature of Salience: An Experimental Investigation of Pure Coordination Games," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(3), pages 658-673, June.
    31. Scott Macdonell & Nick Mastronardi, 2015. "Waging simple wars: a complete characterization of two-battlefield Blotto equilibria," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 58(1), pages 183-216, January.
    32. Isoni, Andrea & Poulsen, Anders & Sugden, Robert & Tsutsui, Kei, 2013. "Focal points in tacit bargaining problems: Experimental evidence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 167-188.
    33. Arad Ayala, 2012. "The Tennis Coach Problem: A Game-Theoretic and Experimental Study," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(1), pages 1-43, April.
    34. Shakun D. Mago & Roman M. Sheremeta, 2017. "Multi‐battle Contests: An Experimental Study," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 84(2), pages 407-425, October.
    35. Caroline D. Thomas, 2009. "N-Dimensional Blotto Game with Asymmetric Battlefield Values," Department of Economics Working Papers 130116, The University of Texas at Austin, Department of Economics, revised Dec 2016.
    36. Alexander Matros, 2007. "A Blotto Game with Incomplete Information," Working Paper 332, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh, revised Jul 2009.
    37. Subhasish Dugar & Quazi Shahriar, 2012. "Focal Points and Economic Efficiency: The Role of Relative Label Salience," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 78(3), pages 954-975, January.
    38. Alex Robson, 2005. "Multi-Item Contests," ANU Working Papers in Economics and Econometrics 2005-446, Australian National University, College of Business and Economics, School of Economics.
    39. Nicola Persico & Alessandro Lizzeri, 2001. "The Provision of Public Goods under Alternative Electoral Incentives," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(1), pages 225-239, March.
    40. Duffy, John & Matros, Alexander, 2017. "Stochastic asymmetric Blotto games: An experimental study," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 88-105.
    41. Adamo, Tim & Matros, Alexander, 2009. "A Blotto game with Incomplete Information," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 105(1), pages 100-102, October.
    42. Alan Washburn, 2013. "OR Forum---Blotto Politics," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 61(3), pages 532-543, June.
    43. Rubinstein, Ariel, 1999. "Experience from a Course in Game Theory: Pre- and Postclass Problem Sets as a Didactic Device," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 155-170, July.
    44. Vincent P. Crawford & Nagore Iriberri, 2007. "Fatal Attraction: Salience, Naïveté, and Sophistication in Experimental "Hide-and-Seek" Games," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(5), pages 1731-1750, December.
    45. Kjell Hausken, 2014. "Individual versus overarching protection and attack of assets," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 22(1), pages 89-112, March.
    46. repec:feb:artefa:0094 is not listed on IDEAS
    47. repec:oup:restud:v:81:y:2014:i:4:p:1518-1542. is not listed on IDEAS
    48. Duffy, John & Matros, Alexander, 2015. "Stochastic asymmetric Blotto games: Some new results," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 4-8.
    49. Osorio, Antonio, 2013. "The lottery Blotto game," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 120(2), pages 164-166.
    50. Snyder, James M, 1989. "Election Goals and the Allocation of Campaign Resources," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 637-660, May.
    51. Shaun Hargreaves Heap & David Rojo Arjona & Robert Sugden, 2014. "How Portable Is Level‐0 Behavior? A Test of Level‐k Theory in Games With Non‐Neutral Frames," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82(3), pages 1133-1151, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Arad, Ayala & Penczynski, Stefan P., 2024. "Multi-dimensional reasoning in competitive resource allocation games: Evidence from intra-team communication," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 355-377.
    2. Dan Kovenock & Brian Roberson & Roman M. Sheremeta, 2019. "The attack and defense of weakest-link networks," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 179(3), pages 175-194, June.
    3. Li, Xinmi & Zheng, Jie, 2022. "Pure strategy Nash Equilibrium in 2-contestant generalized lottery Colonel Blotto games," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    4. Daniel Woods & Mustafa Abdallah & Saurabh Bagchi & Shreyas Sundaram & Timothy Cason, 2022. "Network defense and behavioral biases: an experimental study," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(1), pages 254-286, February.
    5. Sun, Xiang & Xu, Jin & Zhou, Junjie, 2023. "Effort discrimination and curvature of contest technology in conflict networks," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 978-991.
    6. Dong, Lu & Huang, Lingbo & Lien, Jaimie W. & Zheng, Jie, 2024. "How alliances form and conflict ensues," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 255-276.
    7. Kovenock, Dan & Rojo Arjona, David, 2019. "A full characterization of best-response functions in the lottery Colonel Blotto game," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 33-36.
    8. David Iliaev & Sigal Oren & Ella Segev, 2023. "A Tullock-contest-based approach for cyber security investments," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 320(1), pages 61-84, January.
    9. David Rojo-Arjona & R. Stefania Sitzia & Jiwei Zheng, 2020. "The More The Better! Increasing Label Saliency as a way to Increase Coordination. An Experimental Investigation," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Behavioural and Experimental Social Science (CBESS) 20-02, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..

    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. Dan Kovenock & Brian Roberson, 2021. "Generalizations of the General Lotto and Colonel Blotto games," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 71(3), pages 997-1032, April.
    2. Duffy, John & Matros, Alexander, 2017. "Stochastic asymmetric Blotto games: An experimental study," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 88-105.
    3. Dan Kovenock & Brian Roberson & Roman M. Sheremeta, 2019. "The attack and defense of weakest-link networks," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 179(3), pages 175-194, June.
    4. Dan Kovenock & Brian Roberson, 2018. "The Optimal Defense Of Networks Of Targets," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 56(4), pages 2195-2211, October.
    5. John Duffy & Alexander Matros, 2013. "Stochastic Asymmetric Blotto Games: Theory and Experimental Evidence," Working Paper 509, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh, revised Nov 2013.
    6. Dan Kovenock & Brian Roberson, 2015. "The Optimal Defense of Network Connectivity," Working Papers 15-24, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.
    7. Subhasish Chowdhury & Dan Kovenock & Roman Sheremeta, 2013. "An experimental investigation of Colonel Blotto games," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 52(3), pages 833-861, April.
    8. Shakun D. Mago & Roman M. Sheremeta, 2017. "Multi‐battle Contests: An Experimental Study," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 84(2), pages 407-425, October.
    9. Shakun D. Mago & Roman M. Sheremeta, 2019. "New Hampshire Effect: behavior in sequential and simultaneous multi-battle contests," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(2), pages 325-349, June.
    10. Kimbrough, Erik O. & Laughren, Kevin & Sheremeta, Roman, 2020. "War and conflict in economics: Theories, applications, and recent trends," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 998-1013.
    11. Caroline Thomas, 2018. "N-dimensional Blotto game with heterogeneous battlefield values," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 65(3), pages 509-544, May.
    12. Deck, Cary & Sarangi, Sudipta & Wiser, Matt, 2017. "An experimental investigation of simultaneous multi-battle contests with strategic complementarities," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 117-134.
    13. Emmanuel Dechenaux & Dan Kovenock & Roman Sheremeta, 2015. "A survey of experimental research on contests, all-pay auctions and tournaments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(4), pages 609-669, December.
    14. Anbarci, Nejat & Cingiz, Kutay & Ismail, Mehmet S., 2023. "Proportional resource allocation in dynamic n-player Blotto games," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 94-100.
    15. Boyer, Pierre C. & Konrad, Kai A. & Roberson, Brian, 2017. "Targeted campaign competition, loyal voters, and supermajorities," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 49-62.
    16. Deck, Cary & Hao, Li & Porter, David, 2015. "Do prediction markets aid defenders in a weak-link contest?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 248-258.
    17. David Rietzke & Brian Roberson, 2013. "The robustness of ‘enemy-of-my-enemy-is-my-friend’ alliances," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 40(4), pages 937-956, April.
    18. Dan Kovenock & Sudipta Sarangi & Matt Wiser, 2015. "All-pay 2 $$\times $$ × 2 Hex: a multibattle contest with complementarities," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 44(3), pages 571-597, August.
    19. Rafael Hortala-Vallve & Aniol Llorente-Saguer, 2015. "An Experiment on Non-Zero Sum Colonel Blotto Games," Working Papers 779, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
    20. Yosef Rinott & Marco Scarsini & Yaming Yu, 2012. "A Colonel Blotto Gladiator Game," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 37(4), pages 574-590, November.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • D74 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Conflict; Conflict Resolution; Alliances; Revolutions

    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:oup:econjl:v:131:y:2021:i:636:p:1593-1619.. 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: Oxford University Press or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/resssea.html .

    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.