Final Exam Flashcards
Cumulative Prospect Theory (CPT)
Issue with original PT is it allowed for the selection of dominated lotteries.
CPT fixes this by imposing ∑𝜋(𝑝_𝑖)=1
Economists usually cite CPT while Psychologists cite PT
Nash Equilibrium
Definition: A set of strategies in a game where no player can benefit by changing their strategy while the other players keep theirs unchanged.
Example: In the Prisoner’s Dilemma, both prisoners choosing to squeal is a Nash Equilibrium because neither can unilaterally reduce their prison time by changing their strategy.
Allais Paradox
Participants’ choices contradict the independence axiom. They usually prefer a certain gain over a probabilistic gain of higher expected value in gambles 1 and 2, but reverse preference by choosing gamble 4 when comparing 3 and 4.
Gamble 1: (1 million, 1)
Gamble 2: (1 million, .89; 5 million, 0.1; 0, .01)
Gamble 3: (1 million, 0.11; 0, .89)
Gamble 4: (5 million, .1; .9, 0)
WARP (Weak Axiom of Revealed Preferences)
Definition: If option A is chosen over B when both are available, then A should always be chosen over B, regardless of other options.
Certainty Equivalent
Definition: The guaranteed amount of money that someone would accept instead of taking a gamble with a higher, uncertain payout.
Example: Accepting a guaranteed $40 instead of a 50% chance at $100.
DU and Time Consistency
- Intertemporal Choice is Time Consistent if the preference between choices remains consistent through time.
- Time Consistency is a requirement of DU.
- Violating Time Consistency means you can’t be a DU Maximizer!
Examples:
1. For the $100 Sooner or Later scenario, you first state that you prefer foregoing an extra $1 in one week in favor of $100 now, but that 50 weeks from now, you instead prefer waiting one week for the extra $1
- For the Broken Resolutions scenario, you plan to be healthy, but when the time comes to execute your plan, you succumb to temptation and eat the Cookie
Game Theory Assumptions
- All players are maximizing their payoffs/utilities
- All players have common knowledge about the rules of the game
- Each player’s payoff depends on actions taken by all players
- Each player has Complete Information unless otherwise specified: payoffs are common knowledge among all players
- Each player has Perfect Information unless otherwise specified: player knows full history of the game (i.e. previous Chess moves)
Prisoner’s Dilemma
Concept: A fundamental game in game theory illustrating that two individuals might not cooperate, even if it appears that it is in their best interests to do so.
Example: Two criminals are arrested and must decide independently whether to confess. Confessing (squealing) might benefit them individually but not collectively.
Pareto Optimality
Definition: A state of allocation of resources in which it is impossible to make any one individual better off without making at least one individual worse off.
Example: In a different context, allocating hours of operation between two departments in a way that maximizes overall productivity without overburdening any single department.
Game Theory
Definition: A branch of mathematics that studies strategic interactions where the outcomes depend on the actions of multiple agents, each trying to maximize their own payoff.
Example: Strategic decisions in business, such as pricing products or choosing production levels, where outcomes depend on competitors’ actions.
IA Weaknesses
Inequity Averse Utility does better than Selfish Utility in predicting behavior in social choice games
However, as IA Utility is formulated solely by outcomes, it would not be able to capture certain factors like:
- Anonymity of participants
- Source of funds (earned, gift, etc.)
- Nature of recipient (charity, friend, etc.)
Expected Value
Definition: The sum of all possible values each multiplied by the probability of its occurrence.
Example: A lottery ticket offering a 50% chance of $100 and 50% of $0 has an EV of $50.
Market Monopsony Game
Each individual in the class chooses how to split $100 with the Professor, but only the best offer accepted.
Selfish NE to offer $100. Best case scenario is you make $1 by offering $99.
Evaluating BDU
Pros
1. Future gets discounted to the Present
2. Time further into the future gets discounted more
3. Accommodates time inconsistent behavior
Cons
1. Requires an additional 𝛽 discount term (more complex than DU)
Common Ratio Effect
Concept: A violation of the expected utility theory where changing the probabilities of outcomes proportionally across gambles affects preferences.
For higher probabilities of gain, most prefer the larger probability, smaller gain option.
But when the probabilities of gain are low, most prefer the riskier option with the higher gain.
Completeness and Transitivity
Completeness: Every pair of alternatives can be compared.
Transitivity: If option A is preferred to B, and B is preferred to C, then A should be preferred to C.
Sign Effect
The steeper discounting of gains compared to losses.
Thaler suggests this is related to Loss Aversion: losses are out of pocket, so not willing to pay much more for a delay
Inequity Aversion in the Ultimatum Game
Proposer will offer a percentage “s” of their allocation
- Proposer who very strongly dislikes having more than Receiver (𝛽_1>0.5) will offer exactly 50%
- Proposer with 𝛽_1<0.5 will offer the minimum acceptable offer
Predictions are consistent with observed behavior of no offers above 50%, many within 40%-50%, and few low offers.
Sequences Effect
As it relates to wages, workers prefer an increase year over year vs. a flat structure or decreasing structure even if the wages are exactly the same over a period.
Sequences should not impact preference over time in DU and BDU, just discount each amount and add them up and choose the highest!
Splitting $10 Example
Concept: How individuals decide to split a sum of money in social settings, influenced by factors such as fairness, anonymity, reputation, and potential retribution.
Example: Deciding whether to split $10 equally with a professor or take a larger share for oneself based on various personal and social considerations.
Dictator Game
Game consists of a Dictator and one or more other Recipients
The Dictator is the only player who can act
The Dictator decides how they want to split an amount of money with the Recipient
Selfish NE is for the Dictator to offer nothing
Level-k Reasoning & Keynes Beauty Contest
The idea is people are of different levels of strategic reasoning:
Level-0 player guesses randomly, 50∗0.5^0=50 on average
Level-1 player guesses 50∗0.5^1=25
Level-2 player guesses 50∗0.5^2=12.5
Level-∞ player guesses 50∗〖0.5〗^∞=0, which is NE
Every level player thinks there are no levels above them.
Beta-Delta Utility (BDU)
The Beta-Delta Utility (BDU) of an item/money 𝑥 received T periods into the future is
BDU(𝑥, T)=
{ 𝑢(𝑥), T=0
{ 𝛽𝛿^T∗𝑢(𝑥), T>0
where 𝛽<1, 𝛿<1
Decision Rule: Choose the option that maximizes BDU
Compound Interest Formula
FV=PV∗(1+𝑟)^T
t in months or years
r = interest rate
Normative vs. Positive Theories
Normative Theories: Prescriptive, suggesting how decisions should be made.
Positive Theories: Descriptive, explaining how decisions are actually made in practice.
Risky Choice
Definition: Making a decision where outcomes are uncertain but associated probabilities are known.
Example: Tossing a coin where heads might win you $10 and tails wins nothing.
NE vs Level-k
NE is viewed as the purely rational solution concept
Level-k may do better in predicting actual behavior when:
1. NE are difficult to compute or reason
2. Players HAVE varied understanding of game or optimal behavior
3. Players ASSUME varied understanding of game or optimal behavior
NE and DE
- Every Dominant Equilibrium (DE) is a Nash Equilibrium (NE)
- Not Every NE is a DE
- Every finite game has a NE
Risk Preferences
Risk Averse: Preference for certain outcomes over gambles with the same expected outcome.
Risk Neutral: Indifference between certain outcomes and equivalent gambles.
Risk Loving: Preference for gambles over certain outcomes with the same expected outcome.
Nash Equilibrium in the Coordination Game
Game: You and professor each pick heads or tails. Values assigned to each of the four possible combos.
Example 1:
(H,H) and (T,T) = 1
(H,T) and (T,H) = 0
Result: NE is either of the options that equal 1, but the outcome could be anything due to the inability to coordinate.
Example 2:
(H,H) = (2,2)
(T,T) = (1,1)
(H,T) and (T,H) = (0,0)
Result: NE is h,h or t,t but outcome will be h,h.
Ultimatum vs. Monopsony
The Ultimatum Game results starkly varied from the Selfish NE
The Monopsony Game results were close to the Selfish NE
Exponential Discount Factor
PV=FV∗(1/((1+𝑟) ))^T
PV=FV∗𝛿^T
𝛿 (Delta) is the Exponential Discount Factor
Discount Factor = 1/((1+ interest Rate))
Delayed Gratification
The most famous and influential time discounting study is likely the Mischel Marshmallow Experiment. Preschoolers could eat one marshmallow or wait 15 minutes for three marshmallows.
Delayed gratification was a strong predictor of:
- High future self-control and successful pursual of goals
- High parental ratings of attention and intelligence
- Higher SAT scores
- Improved mental health and self-esteem
- Reduced drug consumption
Social Choice
Definition: Social choice theory studies decision-making processes that affect multiple individuals, focusing on how collective decisions are made based on individual preferences.
Example: Choosing how to allocate a budget within a community project, balancing the different needs and preferences of community members.
Three Approaches to Choice
Utility-Only Approach: Decisions are made solely based on utility maximization.
Preference Approach: Choices are based on personal preferences, which could be ranked or unranked.
Revealed Preference Approach: Choices are inferred based on observed behaviors.
Modifications of Theoretical Models
Concept: Adjusting theoretical models based on empirical data to better reflect observed behaviors.
Example: Modifying preference axioms when real-world data show consistent violations.
Risky Lotteries Evaluation
Concept: Analyzing different lotteries based on their expected utility rather than just expected value.
Example: Choosing between a lottery with a high probability of a modest win and a low probability of a large win.
Hormones and the Ultimatum Game
Testosterone reduces generosity and oxytocin increases generosity
Experimental Tests of Theories
Concept: Validating theoretical models by comparing predictions with actual decision-making behavior in controlled experiments.
Example: Using a lab setting to test if people’s choices align with predicted utility maximization.
Certain Choice
Definition: Decision-making process where each option is received with 100% certainty.
Example: Choosing an apple over an orange with no chance of outcome variation.
St. Petersburg Paradox
A casino offers a game of chance for a single player in which a fair coin is tossed at each stage. The initial stake begins at 2 dollars and is doubled every time tails appears. The first time heads appears, the game ends and the player wins whatever is the current stake. What would be a fair price to pay the casino for entering the game?
Expected value = infinity, highlighting limitations of using expected value to make real-life choices.
Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives (IIA) Violation
Concept: Preference between two options should not depend on the presence of a third option.
Example: Choice between gambles is influenced by the introduction or removal of another unrelated gamble.
Discounted Utility (DU)
The Discounted Utility (DU) of an item/money 𝑥 received T periods into the future is
DU(𝑥, T)=𝛿^T∗𝑢(𝑥); where delta < 1
Decision Rule: Choose the option that maximizes DU