Regular Quantal Response Equilibrium
Purchase on Springer.com
$39.95 / €34.95 / £29.95*
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.
The structural Quantal Response Equilibrium (QRE) generalizes the Nash equilibrium by augmenting payoffs with random elements that are not removed in some limit. This approach has been widely used both as a theoretical framework to study comparative statics of games and as an econometric framework to analyze experimental and field data. The framework of structural QRE is flexible: it can be applied to arbitrary finite games and incorporate very general error structures. Restrictions on the error structure are needed, however, to place testable restrictions on the data (Haile et al., 2004). This paper proposes a reduced-form approach, based on quantal response functions that replace the best-response functions underlying the Nash equilibrium. We define a regular QRE as a fixed point of quantal response functions that satisfies four axioms: continuity, interiority, responsiveness, and monotonicity. We show that these conditions are not vacuous and demonstrate with an example that they imply economically sensible restrictions on data consistent with laboratory observations. The reduced-form approach allows for a richer set of regular quantal response functions, which has proven useful for estimation purposes.
- Anderson, S.P., Jacob, K.G., and Charles, A.H. (1998). “Rent Seeking with Bounded Rationality: An Analysis of the All-Pay Auction.” Journal of Political Economy. 106(4), 828–853. CrossRef
- Anderson, S.P., Jacob K.G., and Charles, A.H. (2001). “Minimum-Effort Coordination Games: Stochastic Potential and Logit Equilibrium.” Games and EconomicBehavior. 34(2), 177–199.
- Anderson, S.P., Andre de Palma, and Thisse, J.-F. (1992). Discrete Choice Theory of Product Differentiation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- Camerer, C.F., H. T.-H., and Chong, J.-K. (2002). “Sophisticated Learning and Strategic Teaching.” Journal of Economic Theory. 104, 137–188.
- Capra, C.M., Jacob, K.G., Rosario, G., and Charles, A.H. (1999). “Anomalous Behavior in a Traveler's Dilemma.” American Economic Review. 89(3): 678–690. CrossRef
- Chong, J.-K., Colin, F.C., and H., T.-H. (2005). “A Learning-based Model of Repeated Games with Incomplete Information.” Games and Economic Behavior. forthcoming.
- Dvoretsky, A., Abraham, W., and Jacob, W. (1951). “Elimination of Randomizationin Certain Statistical Decision Problems and Zero-Sum Two-person Games.” Annals of Mathematical Statistics. 22, 1–21.
- Goeree, J.K. and Charles, A.H. (2001). “Ten Little Treasures of Game Theory and Ten Intuitive Contradictions.” American Economic Review. 91(5), 1402–1422. CrossRef
- Goeree, J.K. and Charles, A.H. (forthcoming) “An Explanation of Anomalous Behaviorin Models of Political Participation.” American Political Science Review.
- Goeree, J.K., Charles, A.H., and Thomas, R.P. (2002). “Quantal Response Equilibrium and Overbidding in First-Price Auctions.” Journal of Economic Theory. 104, 247–272. CrossRef
- Goeree, J.K., Charles, A.H., and Thomas, R.P. (2003). “Risk Averse Behavior in Generalized Matching Pennies Games.” Games and Economic Behavior. 45, 97–113. CrossRef
- Goeree, J.K., Thomas, R.P., and Brian, W.R. (2005). “Rank Dependent Choice in Games.” working paper, California Institute of Technology.
- Haile, P.A., Ali, H., and Grigory, K. (2004). “On the Empirical Content of Quantal Response Models.” working paper, University of Wisconsin.
- Harless, D.W. and Colin, F.C. (1994). “The Predictive Utility of Generalized Expected Utility Theories.” Econometrica. 62:6 (November), 1251–1289.
- Harsanyi, J.A. (1973). “Games with Randomly Distributed Payoffs: A New Rationale for Mixed-Strategy Equilibrium Points.” International Journal of Game Theory. 2, 1–23.
- Hey, J.D. and Chris, O. (1994). “Investigating Generalization of Expected Utility Theory Using Experimental Data.” Econometrica. 62:6 (November), 1291–1326.
- Hey, J.D. (2005). “Why We Should Not Be Silent About Noise.” working paper,Universities of York and Bari.
- Holt, C.A. (2004). “Markets, Games, and Strategic Behavior.” unpublishedmanuscript: http://www.people.virginia.edu/simcah2k/expbooknsf.pdf
- Karlin, S. (1966). A First Course in Stochastic Processes. Academic Press: New York.
- Laury, S.K. and Charles, A.H. (2002). “Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects.” American Economic Review. December, 93(5).
- Loomes, G. (2005). “Modelling the Stochastic Component of Behaviour: Some Implicationsand Problems for Testing Models.” working paper, Unievrsity of East Anglia.
- Luce, D. (1959). Individual Choice Behavior. New York: Wiley.
- McFadden, D. (1981). “Econometric Models of Probabilistic Choice.” in Structural Analysis of Discrete Data with Econometric Applications. Manski C. and McFadden D., eds.,MIT Press, Cambridge, 198–272.
- McKelvey, R.D. and Thomas, R.P. (1992). “An Experimental Study of the Centipede Game.” Econometrica. 60(4), 803–836.
- McKelvey, R.D. and Thomas, R.P. (1994). “Quantal Response Equilibrium for Normal Form Games.” Social Science Working Paper # 883. California Institute of Technology, March.
- McKelvey, R.D. and Thomas, R.P. (1995). “Quantal Response Equilibria for Normal Form Games.” Games and Economic Behavior. 10(1), 6–38. CrossRef
- McKelvey, R.D. and Thomas, R.P. (1996). “A Statistical Theory of Equilibrium in Games.” Japanese Economic Review. 47(2): pp. 186–209.
- McKelvey, R.D. and Thomas, R.P. (1998). “Quantal Response Equilibria for Extensive Form Games.” Experimental Economics. 1(1), 9–41.
- McKelvey, R.D., Thomas, R.P., and Roberto, W. (2000). “The Effects of Payoff Magnitude and Heterogeneity on Behavior in 2 × 2 Games with a Unique Mixed-Strategy Equilibrium.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization. 42, 523–548. CrossRef
- Myerson, R.B. (1978). “Refinements of the Nash Equilibrium Concept.” International Journal of Game Theory. 7, 73–80. CrossRef
- Ochs, J. (1995). “Games with a Unique Mixed-Strategy Equilibrium: An Experimental Study.” Games and Economic Behavior. 10, 202–217. CrossRef
- Rosenthal, R.W. (1989). “A Bounded Rationality Approach to the Study of Non-Cooperative Games.” International Journal of Game Theory. 2, 65–67.
- Selten, R. (1965). “Spieltheoretische Behandlung eines Oligopolmodells mit Nachfrage-tragheit.” Zeitschrift für die Gesamte Staatswissenschaft. 121,301–324, 667–689.
- Selten, R. (1975). “Reexamination of the Perfectness Concept for Equilibrium Pointsin Extensive Games.” International Journal of Game Theory. 4, 25–55. CrossRef
- von Neumann, J. (1928). “Zur Theorie der Gesellschaftsspiele.” Mathematische Annalen. 100, 295–320. CrossRef
- von Neumann, J. and Oskar, M. (1944). Theory of Games and EconomicBehavior. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
- Wald, A. (1945). “Statistical Decision Fucntions Which Minimize the Maximum Risk.” Annals of Mathematics. 46, 265–80.
- Regular Quantal Response Equilibrium
Volume 8, Issue 4 , pp 347-367
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Kluwer Academic Publishers
- Additional Links
- quantal response equilibrium
- discrete choice models
- reduced-form approach
- Industry Sectors
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences, California Institute of Technology, Mail code 228-77, Pasadena, CA, 91125, USA
- 2. Department of Economics, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, 22904-4182, USA
- 3. Department of Economics, Princeton University, 112 Fisher Hall, Princeton, NJ, 08540, USA