Paper detail

A Statistical View of Learning in the Centipede Game

In this article we evaluate the statistical evidence that a population of students learn about the sub-game perfect Nash equilibrium of the centipede game via repeated play of the game. This is done by formulating a model in which a player's error in assessing the utility of decisions changes as they gain experience with the game. We first estimate parameters in a statistical model where the probabilities of choices of the players are given by a Quantal Response Equilibrium (QRE) (McKelvey and Palfrey, 1995, 1996, 1998), but are allowed to change with repeated play. This model gives a better fit to the data than similar models previously considered. However, substantial correlation of outcomes of games having a common player suggests that a statistical model that captures within-subject correlation is more appropriate. Thus we then estimate parameters in a model which allows for within-player correlation of decisions and rates of learning. Through out the paper we also consider and compare the use of randomization tests and posterior predictive tests in the context of exploratory and confirmatory data analyses.

preprint2010arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.