No abstract

No abstract

When coordination games are played under the logit choice rule and there is intentional bias in agents' non-best response behavior, the Egalitarian bargaining solution emerges as the long run social norm. Without intentional bias, a new solution, the Logit bargaining solution emerges as the long run norm. These results contrast with results under non-payoff dependent deviations from best response behavior, where it has previously been shown that the Kalai-Smorodinsky and Nash bargaining solutions emerge as long run norms. Experiments on human subjects suggest that non-best response play is payoff dependent and displays intentional bias. This suggests the Egalitarian solution as the most likely candidate for a long run bargaining norm.

A coordination game is repeatedly played on a graph by players (vertices) who have heterogeneous cardinal preferences and whose strategy choice is governed by the individualistic asynchronous logit dynamic. The idea of potential driven autonomy of sets of players is used to derive results on the possibility of heterogeneous preferences leading to heterogeneous behavior. In particular, a class of graphs is identified such that for large enough graphs in this class, diversity in ordinal preferences will nearly always lead to heterogeneity in behavior, regardless of the cardinal strength of the preferences. These results have implications for network design problems, such as when a social planner wishes to induce homogeneous/heterogeneous behavior in a population.

This paper considers incentives to provide goods that are partially excludable along social links. Individuals face a capacity constraint in that, conditional upon providing, they may nominate only a subset of neighbours as co-beneficiaries.Our model has two typically incompatible ingredients: (i) a graphical game (individuals decide how much of the good to provide), and (ii) graph formation (individuals decide which subset of neighbours to nominate as co-beneficiaries).