International Journal of Game Theory

, Volume 26, Issue 4, pp 439–453 | Cite as

Satisficing leads to cooperation in mutual interests games

  • Amit Pazgal


We study the play of mutual interests games by satisficing decision makers. We show that, for a high enough initial aspiration level, and under certain assumptions of “tremble”, there is a high probability (close to unity) of convergence to the Pareto dominant cooperative outcome. Simulations indicate that the theoretical result is robust with respect to the “trembling” mechanism.


Decision Maker High Probability Theoretical Result Economic Theory Game Theory 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Abreu D, Rubinstein A (1988) The structure of Nash equilibrium in repeated games with finite automata. Econometrica 56: 1259–1281Google Scholar
  2. Anderlini L, Ianni A (1993) Path dependence and learning from neighbors. Mimeo, Cambridge UniversityGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderlini L, Sabourian H (1990) Cooperation and effective computability. Mimeo, Cambridge UniversityGoogle Scholar
  4. Aumann RJ (1990) Communication need not lead to Nash equilibrium. Mimeo, Hebrew University of JerusalemGoogle Scholar
  5. Aumann RJ, Sorin S (1986) Cooperation and bounded recall. Games and Economics Behavior 1: 5–39Google Scholar
  6. Balkenborg D (1993) Strictness, evolutionary stability and repeated games with common interests. Mimeo, University of PennsylvaniaGoogle Scholar
  7. Bendor J, Mookherjee D, Ray D (1994) Aspirations, adaptive learning and cooperation in repeated games. Mimeo, Boston UniversityGoogle Scholar
  8. Binmore K, Samuelson L (1992) Evolutionary stability in repeated games played by finite automata. Journal of Economic Theory 57: 278–305Google Scholar
  9. Binmore K, Samuelson L (1992) Evolutionary stability in repeated games played by finite automata. Journal of Economic Theory 57: 278–305Google Scholar
  10. Gilboa I, Schmeidler D (1992) Case-based decision theory. Quarterly Journal of Economics, forthcomingGoogle Scholar
  11. Gilboa I, Schmeidler D (1993) Case-based optimization. Games and Economics Behavior forthcomingGoogle Scholar
  12. Kehneman D, Tversky A (1984) Choices, values and frames. American Psychologist 39: 341–350Google Scholar
  13. Kandori M, Mailath G, Rob R (1993) Learning, mutations and long run equilibria in repeated games. Econometrica 61: 27–56Google Scholar
  14. Kim YG, Sobel J (1991) An evolutionary approach to pre-play communication. MimeoGoogle Scholar
  15. March JG, Simon HA (1958) Organizations. John Wiley and Sons, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. Matsui A (1991) Cheap talk and cooperation in society. Journal of Economic Theory 54: 245–258Google Scholar
  17. Osbourne MJ (1990) Signaling, forward induction, and stability in finitely repeated games. Journal of Economic Theory 50: 22–36Google Scholar
  18. Neyman A (1985) Bounded complexity justifies cooperation in the finitely repeated prisoner's dilemma. Economic Letters 19: 227–229Google Scholar
  19. Rubinstein A (1986) Finite automata play the repeated prisoner's dilemma. Journal of Economic Theory 39: 83–96Google Scholar
  20. Shirayayev AN (1984) Graduate texts in mathematics: Probability. Springer Verlag, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. Shoham Y, Tennenholtz M (1993) Co-learning and the evolution of social activity. Mimeo, Stanford UniversityGoogle Scholar
  22. Simon HA (1955) A behavioral model of rational choice. Quarterly Journal of Economics 69: 99–118Google Scholar
  23. Schlag K (1993) Cheap talk and evolutionary dynamics. Mimeo, University of BonnGoogle Scholar
  24. WÄrneryd K (1990) Cheap talk, coordination and evolutionary stability. Mimeo, Stockholm School of EconomicsGoogle Scholar
  25. Young PH (1993) The evolution of conventions. Econometrica 61: 57–84Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Physica-Verlag 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Amit Pazgal
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Managerial Economics and Decision Sciences, Kellogg Graduate School of ManagementNorthwestern UniversityEvanstonUSA

Personalised recommendations