Learning in and about Games
Anke Gerber
Abstract
Open-access reader
Anke Gerber
Abstract
Open-access reader
We study finitely repeated 2 / 2 normal form games, where playersnhave incomplete information about their opponents’ payoffs. In a laboratory experiment we investigate whether players (a) learn the game they are playing, (b) learn to predict the behavior of their opponent, and (c)nlearn to play according to a Nash equilibrium of the repeated game. Ournresults show that the success in learning the opponent’s type depends on the characteristics of the true game. The learning success is much higher for games with pure strategy Nash equilibria than for games with a unique mixed strategy Nash equilibrium, and it is higher for games with symmetricnpure strategy Nash equilibria than for games with asymmetric equilibria. Moreover, subjects learn to predict the opponents’ behavior very well. However, they rarely play according to a Nash equilibrium and we observenno correlation between equilibrium play and learning about the game.
OpenAlex reports 6 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
We study finitely repeated 2 / 2 normal form games, where playersnhave incomplete information about their opponents’ payoffs. In a laboratory experiment we investigate whether players (a) learn the game they are playing, (b) learn to predict the behavior of their opponent, and (c)nlearn to play according to a Nash equilibrium of the repeated game. Ournresults show that the success in learning the opponent’s type depends on the characteristics of the true game. The learning success is much higher for games with pure strategy Nash equilibria than for games with a unique mixed strategy Nash equilibrium, and it is higher for games with symmetricnpure strategy Nash equilibria than for games with asymmetric equilibria. Moreover, subjects learn to predict the opponents’ behavior very well. However, they rarely play according to a Nash equilibrium and we observenno correlation between equilibrium play and learning about the game.
Key concepts: Nash equilibrium, Mathematical economics, Best response, Epsilon-equilibrium, Repeated game, Equilibrium selection, Correlated equilibrium, Complete information