Đang chuẩn bị liên kết để tải về tài liệu:
Behavioral Game Theory: Thinking, Learning, and Teaching

Game theory is a mathematical system for analyzing and predicting how humans behave in strategic situations. Standard equilibrium analyses assume all players: 1) form beliefs based on analysis of what others might do (strategic thinking); 2) choose a best response given those beliefs (optimization); 3) adjust best responses and beliefs until they are mutually consistent (equilibrium). | Behavioral Game Theory Thinking Learning and Teaching Colin F. Camerer1 California Institute of Technology Pasadena CA 91125 Teck-Hua Ho Wharton School University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia PA 19104 Juin Kuan Chong National University of Singapore Kent Ridge Crescent Singapore 119260 November 14 2001 1 This research was supported by NSF grants SBR 9730364 SBR 9730187 and SES-0078911. Thanks to many people for helpful comments on this research particularly Caltech colleagues especially Richard McKelvey Tom Palfrey and Charles Plott Monica Capra Vince Crawford John Dufly Drew Fuden-berg John Kagel members of the MacArthur Preferences Network our research assistants and collaborators Dan Clendenning Graham Free David Hsia Ming Hsu Hongjai Rhee and Xin Wang and seminar audience members too numerous to mention. Dan Levin gave the shooting-ahead military example. Dave Cooper Ido Erev and Bill Frechette wrote helpful emails. 1 1 Introduction Game theory is a mathematical system for analyzing and predicting how humans behave in strategic situations. Standard equilibrium analyses assume all players 1 form beliefs based on analysis of what others might do strategic thinking 2 choose a best response given those beliefs optimization 3 adjust best responses and beliefs until they are mutually consistent equilibrium . It is widely- accepted that not every player behaves rationally in complex situations so assumptions 1 and 2 are sometimes violated. For explaining consumer choices and other decisions rationality may still be an adequate approximation even if a modest percentage of players violate the theory But game theory is different. Players fates are intertwined. The presence of player s who do not think strategically or optimize can therefore change what rational players should do. As a result what a population of players is likely to do when some are not thinking strategically and optimizing can only be predicted by an analysis which uses the tools of 1 - 3 but accounts .