IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwpga/0507003.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Time Inconsistency And Learning In Bargaining Games

Author

Listed:
  • Zafer Akin

    (Pennsylvania State University)

Abstract

The literature on time-inconsistent preferences introduced naive, partially naive and sophisticated as types of agents that represent different levels of unawareness of agents' self-control problems. This paper incorporates time-inconsistent players in a sequential bargaining model. We first consider 'naive' agents who never learn about their types and show that bargaining between such a player and a standard exponential agent ends in immediate agreement. The more naive a player, the higher his share. If naive agents can learn their type over time, we show that there is a critical date such that there is no agreement before that date. Hence, existence of time-inconsistent players who can learn as they play the game can be another explanation for delays in bargaining.

Suggested Citation

  • Zafer Akin, 2005. "Time Inconsistency And Learning In Bargaining Games," Game Theory and Information 0507003, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpga:0507003
    Note: Type of Document - pdf; pages: 40
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/game/papers/0507/0507003.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rubinstein, Ariel, 1982. "Perfect Equilibrium in a Bargaining Model," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(1), pages 97-109, January.
    2. Malmendier, Ulrike M. & Della Vigna, Stefano, 2002. "Overestimating Self-Control: Evidence from the Health Club Industry," Research Papers 1880, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    3. E. S. Phelps & R. A. Pollak, 1968. "On Second-Best National Saving and Game-Equilibrium Growth," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 35(2), pages 185-199.
    4. Ted O'Donoghue & Matthew Rabin, 1999. "Incentives for Procrastinators," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(3), pages 769-816.
    5. David Laibson, 1997. "Golden Eggs and Hyperbolic Discounting," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(2), pages 443-478.
    6. Dan Lovallo & Colin Camerer, 1999. "Overconfidence and Excess Entry: An Experimental Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(1), pages 306-318, March.
    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. Jinrui Pan & Craig Webb & Horst Zank, 2013. "Discounting the Subjective Present and Future," Economics Discussion Paper Series 1305, Economics, The University of Manchester.
    2. Fabian Herweg & Daniel Müller, 2011. "Performance of procrastinators: on the value of deadlines," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 70(3), pages 329-366, March.
    3. Gans, Joshua S. & Landry, Peter, 2022. "I’m not sure what to think about them: Confronting naive present bias in a dynamic threshold public goods game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 197(C), pages 195-204.
    4. Kim, Jeongbin & Lim, Wooyoung & Schweighofer-Kodritsch, Sebastian, 2020. "Bargaining and Time Preferences: An Experimental Study," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 254, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    5. Yixuan Shi, 2022. "Dynamic Volunteer's Dilemma with Procrastinators," Working Papers tax-mpg-rps-2022-17, Max Planck Institute for Tax Law and Public Finance.
    6. Akin, Zafer, 2009. "Imperfect information processing in sequential bargaining games with present biased preferences," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 642-650, August.
    7. Murat Yilmaz, 2018. "An Extended Survey of Time-Inconsistency and Its Applications," Bogazici Journal, Review of Social, Economic and Administrative Studies, Bogazici University, Department of Economics, vol. 32(1), pages 55-73.
    8. Claudia Cerrone, 2021. "Doing It When Others Do: A Strategic Model Of Procrastination," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(1), pages 315-328, January.
    9. Akin, Zafer, 2012. "Intertemporal decision making with present biased preferences," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 30-47.
    10. Borissov, Kirill & Pakhnin, Mikhail & Wendner, Ronald, 2024. "General equilibrium and dynamic inconsistency," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    11. Fahn, Matthias & Seibel, Regina, 2022. "Present bias in the labor market – when it pays to be naive," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 144-167.
    12. Pan, Jinrui & Webb, Craig S. & Zank, Horst, 2015. "An extension of quasi-hyperbolic discounting to continuous time," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 43-55.
    13. Manuel A. Utset, 2023. "Time-Inconsistent Bargaining and Cross-Commitments," Games, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-21, April.
    14. Sebastian Schweighofer-Kodritsch, 2015. "Time Preferences and Bargaining," STICERD - Theoretical Economics Paper Series /2015/568, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
    15. Marco A. Haan & Dominic Hauck, 2023. "Games with possibly naive present-biased players," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 95(2), pages 173-203, August.
    16. Kristal K. Trejo & Ruben Juarez & Julio B. Clempner & Alexander S. Poznyak, 2023. "Non-Cooperative Bargaining with Unsophisticated Agents," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 61(3), pages 937-974, March.
    17. Joshua S. Gans & Peter Landry, 2016. "Procrastination in Teams," NBER Working Papers 21891, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Haan, Marco & Hauck, Dominic, 2014. "Games With Possibly Naive Hyperbolic Discounters," MPRA Paper 57960, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Lu, Shih En, 2016. "Self-control and bargaining," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 390-413.

    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. Akin, Zafer, 2012. "Intertemporal decision making with present biased preferences," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 30-47.
    2. Teck H. Ho & Noah Lim & Colin Camerer, 2005. "Modeling the Psychology of Consumer and Firm Behavior with Behavioral Economics," Levine's Bibliography 784828000000000476, UCLA Department of Economics.
    3. Lu, Shih En, 2016. "Self-control and bargaining," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 390-413.
    4. Weinschenk, Philipp, 2021. "On the benefits of time-inconsistent preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 185-195.
    5. Stefano DellaVigna, 2009. "Psychology and Economics: Evidence from the Field," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 315-372, June.
    6. O'Donoghue, Ted & Rabin, Matthew, 2008. "Procrastination on long-term projects," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 161-175, May.
    7. Salanie, Francois & Treich, Nicolas, 2006. "Over-savings and hyperbolic discounting," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 50(6), pages 1557-1570, August.
    8. Kyle Hyndman & Alberto Bisin, 2022. "Procrastination, self-imposed deadlines and other commitment devices," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 74(3), pages 871-897, October.
    9. Juan D. Carrillo & Mathias Dewatripont, 2008. "Promises, Promises, …," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(531), pages 1453-1473, August.
    10. Altınok, Ahmet & Yılmaz, Murat, 2018. "Dynamic voluntary contribution to a public project under time inconsistency," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 114-140.
    11. Tyson, Christopher J., 2008. "Management of a capital stock by Strotz's naive planner," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 2214-2239, July.
    12. Hanming Fang & Dan Silverman, 2009. "Time-Inconsistency And Welfare Program Participation: Evidence From The Nlsy," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 50(4), pages 1043-1077, November.
    13. Camilo Hern'andez & Dylan Possamai, 2020. "Me, myself and I: a general theory of non-Markovian time-inconsistent stochastic control for sophisticated agents," Papers 2002.12572, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2021.
    14. Kim, Jeongbin & Lim, Wooyoung & Schweighofer-Kodritsch, Sebastian, 2020. "Bargaining and Time Preferences: An Experimental Study," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 254, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    15. Jianjun Miao, 2008. "Option exercise with temptation," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 34(3), pages 473-501, March.
    16. Lu, Shih En, 2016. "Models of limited self-control: Comparison and implications for bargaining," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 186-191.
    17. Marco Persichina, 2024. "Present Bias in Renewable Resource Management and Agent’s Welfare," Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics, , vol. 36(1), pages 79-97, January.
    18. Gilpatric, Scott M., 2008. "Present-biased preferences, self-awareness and shirking," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 67(3-4), pages 735-754, September.
    19. Hammond, Peter J & Zank, Horst, 2013. "Rationality and Dynamic Consistency under Risk and Uncertainty," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1033, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    20. Yılmaz, Murat, 2015. "Contracting with a naïve time-inconsistent agent: To exploit or not to exploit?," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 46-51.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Hyperbolic discounting; learning; bargaining; delay;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C7 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory
    • D8 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty

    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:wpa:wuwpga:0507003. 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: EconWPA (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de .

    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.