IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/r/eee/jetheo/v93y2000i2p205-232.html
   My bibliography  Save this item

On the Testable Implications of Collective Choice Theories

Citations

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


Cited by:

  1. Kalai, Gil, 2003. "Learnability and rationality of choice," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 113(1), pages 104-117, November.
  2. Xu, Yongsheng & Zhou, Lin, 2007. "Rationalizability of choice functions by game trees," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 134(1), pages 548-556, May.
  3. Donni, Olivier & Molina, José Alberto, 2018. "Household Collective Models: Three Decades of Theoretical Contributions and Empirical Evidence," IZA Discussion Papers 11915, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
  4. Lee, SangMok, 2012. "The testable implications of zero-sum games," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 39-46.
  5. Carvajal, Andrés & González, Natalia, 2014. "On refutability of the Nash bargaining solution," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 177-186.
  6. Andrés Carvajal & Rahul Deb & James Fenske & John Quah, 2014. "A nonparametric analysis of multi-product oligopolies," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 57(2), pages 253-277, October.
  7. Echenique, Federico & Ivanov, Lozan, 2011. "Implications of Pareto efficiency for two-agent (household) choice," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 129-136, March.
  8. Li, Jiangtao & Tang, Rui, 2017. "Every random choice rule is backwards-induction rationalizable," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 563-567.
  9. Bergemann, Dirk & Morris, Stephen & Takahashi, Satoru, 2017. "Interdependent preferences and strategic distinguishability," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 329-371.
  10. Ray, Indrajit & Snyder, Susan, 2013. "Observable implications of Nash and subgame-perfect behavior in extensive games," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(6), pages 471-477.
  11. Sprumont, Yves, 2001. "Paretian Quasi-orders: The Regular Two-Agent Case," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 101(2), pages 437-456, December.
  12. João V. Ferreira & Nicolas Gravel, 2017. "Choice with Time," AMSE Working Papers 1729, Aix-Marseille School of Economics, France.
  13. Walter Bossert & Yves Sprumont, 2013. "Every Choice Function Is Backwards‐Induction Rationalizable," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 81(6), pages 2521-2534, November.
  14. Ray, Indrajit & Snyder, Susan, 2013. "Observable implications of Nash and subgame-perfect behavior in extensive games," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(6), pages 471-477.
  15. Thomas Demuynck, 2014. "The computational complexity of rationalizing Pareto optimal choice behavior," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 42(3), pages 529-549, March.
  16. Robert R. Routledge, 2009. "Testable implications of the Bertrand model," Economics Discussion Paper Series 0918, Economics, The University of Manchester.
  17. Cherchye, L.J.H. & Demuynck, T. & de Rock, B., 2009. "Degrees of Cooperation in Household Consumption Models : A Revealed Preference Analysis," Other publications TiSEM 097597d5-7724-4d31-b044-e, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
  18. Ray, Indrajit & Snyder, Susan, 2013. "Observable implications of Nash and subgame-perfect behavior in extensive games," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(6), pages 471-477.
  19. Walter Bossert & Yves Sprumont, 2002. "Core rationalizability in two-agent exchange economies," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 20(4), pages 777-791.
  20. , & ,, 2012. "Reason-based choice: a bargaining rationale for the attraction and compromise effects," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 7(1), January.
  21. Carvajal, Andres & Quah, John K.-H., 2009. "A Nonparametric Analysis of the Cournot Model," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 922, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
  22. Pierre-André Chiappori & Olivier Donni, 2005. "Learning From a Piece of Pie: The Empirical Content of Nash Bargaining," THEMA Working Papers 2006-07, THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise.
  23. Freer, Mikhail & Martinelli, César, 2021. "A utility representation theorem for general revealed preference," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 68-76.
  24. Laurens Cherchye & Sam Cosaert & Thomas Demuynck & Bram De Rock, 2020. "Group Consumption with Caring Individuals," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 130(627), pages 587-622.
  25. Ray, Indrajit & Zhou, Lin, 2001. "Game Theory via Revealed Preferences," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 415-424, November.
  26. Andrés Carvajal, 2003. "Testable Restrictions of Nash Equilibrium in Games with Continuous Domains," Borradores de Economia 229, Banco de la Republica de Colombia.
  27. Bossert, Walter & Sprumont, Yves, 2003. "Efficient and non-deteriorating choice," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 131-142, April.
  28. Anis Hoayek & Hassan Hamie & Hans Auer, 2020. "Modeling the Price Stability and Predictability of Post Liberalized Gas Markets Using the Theory of Information," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-20, June.
  29. Carvajal, Andres & Ray, Indrajit & Snyder, Susan, 2004. "Equilibrium behavior in markets and games: testable restrictions and identification," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(1-2), pages 1-40, February.
  30. Nishimura, Hiroki, 2021. "Revealed preferences of individual players in sequential games," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
  31. BOSSERT, Walter & SUZUMURA, Kotaro, 2006. "Non-Deteriorating Choice without Full Transitivity," Cahiers de recherche 2006-13, Universite de Montreal, Departement de sciences economiques.
  32. Kfir Eliaz & Michael Richter & Ariel Rubinstein, 2011. "Choosing the two finalists," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 46(2), pages 211-219, February.
  33. Lee, Byung Soo & Stewart, Colin, 2016. "Identification of payoffs in repeated games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 82-88.
  34. Demuynck, Thomas & Lauwers, Luc, 2009. "Nash rationalization of collective choice over lotteries," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 1-15, January.
  35. Demuynck, Thomas, 2011. "The computational complexity of rationalizing boundedly rational choice behavior," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(4-5), pages 425-433.
  36. Forges, Françoise & Minelli, Enrico, 2009. "Afriat's theorem for general budget sets," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(1), pages 135-145, January.
  37. Anis Hoayek & Hassan Hamie & Hans Auer, 2020. "Modeling the Price Stability and Predictability of Post Liberalized Gas Markets Using the Theory of Information," Post-Print emse-03604655, HAL.
  38. John Duggan & Michel Le Breton, 2014. "Choice-theoretic Solutions for Strategic Form Games," RCER Working Papers 580, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
  39. Rehbeck, John, 2018. "Note on unique Nash equilibrium in continuous games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 216-225.
  40. Arianna Degan & Antonio Merlo, 2007. "Do Voters Vote Ideologically?, Third Version," PIER Working Paper Archive 08-034, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania, revised 01 Aug 2008.
  41. Castillo, Marco E. & Cross, Philip J. & Freer, Mikhail, 2019. "Nonparametric utility theory in strategic settings: Revealing preferences and beliefs from proposal–response games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 60-82.
  42. Federico Echenique, 2008. "What Matchings Can Be Stable? The Testable Implications of Matching Theory," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(3), pages 757-768, August.
  43. Galambos, Adam, 2019. "Descriptive complexity and revealed preference theory," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 54-64.
  44. Geoffroy Clippel & Kareen Rozen, 2023. "Empirical content of classic assignment methods: jungle and market economy," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 76(3), pages 813-825, October.
  45. Cherepanov, Vadim & Feddersen, Timothy & ,, 2013. "Rationalization," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 8(3), September.
  46. Hassan Hamie & Anis Hoayek & Hans Auer, 2020. "Modeling Post-Liberalized European Gas Market Concentration—A Game Theory Perspective," Forecasting, MDPI, vol. 3(1), pages 1-16, December.
  47. Rehbeck, John, 2014. "Every choice correspondence is backwards-induction rationalizable," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 207-210.
IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.