IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/adl/wpaper/2009-35.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

What Matters Most: Information or Interaction? The Importance of Behavioral Rules on Network Effects for Contagion Processes

Author

Listed:
  • Virginie Masson

    (School of Economics, University of Adelaide)

  • Simon Angus

    (School of Economics, Monash University)

Abstract

We consider a finite population of agents and define a contagion process as the dynamics by which an action, which is initially played by only a small subset of agents, is adopted by the entire population. Each agent has a set of neighbors with whom he shares information and a set of partners with whom he plays a game. These two sets may or may not coincide. Each period, agents choose their actions based on what they observe from their neighbors, and get some payoff from playing a game with their partners. We show that contagion of an action that is risk dominant and efficient is obtained through partners when agents imitate-the-best, and through neighbors when agents use a myopic best response.

Suggested Citation

  • Virginie Masson & Simon Angus, 2009. "What Matters Most: Information or Interaction? The Importance of Behavioral Rules on Network Effects for Contagion Processes," School of Economics and Public Policy Working Papers 2009-35, University of Adelaide, School of Economics and Public Policy.
    • Handle: RePEc:adl:wpaper:2009-35
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://media.adelaide.edu.au/economics/papers/doc/wp2009-35.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dunia López-Pintado, 2006. "Contagion and coordination in random networks," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 34(3), pages 371-381, October.
    2. Alós-Ferrer, Carlos & Weidenholzer, Simon, 2008. "Contagion and efficiency," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 143(1), pages 251-274, November.
    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. Simon Angus & Virginie Masson, 2010. "The Effects of Information and Interactions on Contagion Processes," School of Economics and Public Policy Working Papers 2010-12, University of Adelaide, School of Economics and Public Policy.
    2. Siegfried Berninghaus & Hans Haller, 2010. "Local Interaction on Random Graphs," Games, MDPI, vol. 1(3), pages 1-24, August.
    3. Kovarik, J. & Mengel, F. & Romero, J.G., 2009. "(Anti-) coordination in networks," Research Memorandum 041, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    4. Tinic, Murat & Sensoy, Ahmet & Demir, Muge & Nguyen, Duc Khuong, 2020. "Broker Network Connectivity and the Cross-Section of Expected Stock Returns," MPRA Paper 104719, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Roland Pongou & Roberto Serrano, 2009. "A dynamic theory of fidelity networks with an application to the spread of HIV/AIDS," Working Papers 2009-03, Instituto Madrileño de Estudios Avanzados (IMDEA) Ciencias Sociales.
    6. Kreindler, Gabriel E. & Young, H. Peyton, 2013. "Fast convergence in evolutionary equilibrium selection," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 39-67.
    7. Ennio Bilancini & Leonardo Boncinelli, 2020. "The evolution of conventions under condition-dependent mistakes," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 69(2), pages 497-521, March.
    8. Fosco, Constanza & Mengel, Friederike, 2011. "Cooperation through imitation and exclusion in networks," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 641-658, May.
    9. Kuhfuss, Laure & Préget, Raphaële & Thoyer, Sophie & de Vries, Frans P. & Hanley, Nick, 2022. "Enhancing spatial coordination in payment for ecosystem services schemes with non-pecuniary preferences," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    10. Yasuhiro Shirata, 2020. "Evolution of a Collusive Price in a Networked Market," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 528-554, June.
    11. Azomahou, T. & Opolot, D., 2014. "Stability and strategic diffusion in networks," MERIT Working Papers 2014-035, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    12. Abhimanyu Khan, 2014. "Coordination under global random interaction and local imitation," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 43(4), pages 721-745, November.
    13. Frey Vincenz & Corten Rense & Buskens Vincent, 2012. "Equilibrium Selection in Network Coordination Games: An Experimental Study," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 11(3), pages 1-28, September.
    14. Hsiao-Chi Chen & Yunshyong Chow & Li-Chau Wu, 2013. "Imitation, local interaction, and coordination," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 42(4), pages 1041-1057, November.
    15. Monika Verma & Thomas W. Hertel & Ernesto Valenzuela, 2011. "Are The Poverty Effects of Trade Policies Invisible?," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 25(2), pages 190-211, May.
    16. Boyer, Tristan & Jonard, Nicolas, 2014. "Imitation and efficient contagion," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 20-32.
    17. Fulin Guo, 2023. "Experience-weighted attraction learning in network coordination games," Papers 2310.18835, arXiv.org.
    18. Jonas Hedlund, 2015. "Imitation in Cournot oligopolies with multiple markets," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 60(3), pages 567-587, November.
    19. Pin, Paolo & Weidenholzer, Elke & Weidenholzer, Simon, 2017. "Constrained mobility and the evolution of efficient outcomes," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 165-175.
    20. Ge Jiang & Simon Weidenholzer, 2017. "Local interactions under switching costs," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 64(3), pages 571-588, October.

    More about this item

    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:adl:wpaper:2009-35. 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: Qazi Haque (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/decadau.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.