Equilibrium behavior in all-pay auction with complete information

  • Gladys López Acevedo World Bank
Keywords: Nash equilibria, all-pay auction
JEL Classification: C72, C91

Abstract

A widely used sealed-bid auction is the first-price auction. In this auction, the highest bidder wins the item and pays the price submitted; the other bidders get and pay nothing. The all-pay auction is similar to the first-price auction, except that losers must also pay their submitted bids. The Nash equilibria of this game involve the use of randomized strategies, which protect bidders from being overbid by a small amount. This paper generalizes the standard Nash equilibrium analysis of the all-pay auction to allow for endogenously determined decision "errors". Such errors may either be due to mistakes or to unobserved random variation in payoff functions. The error distributions depend on equilibrium expected payoffs, which in turn determine the error distributions as a fixed point. A striking result derived in this paper is that for any structure of the error terms the generalized Nash equilibrium and the Nash equilibrium of the all-pay auction are equivalent if the error terms are identically and independently distributed.

References

Alchian, A. A. (1950). “Uncertainty, Evolution, and Economic Theory”, Journal of Political Economy, vol. 58, pp. 211-222.

Anderson, L. (1997). “Information Cascades: A Logistic Error Model of Laboratory Data”, American Economic Review, vol. 87, No. 5, pp. 847-862.

Banks, J. et al. (1994). “An Experimental Analysis of Nash Refinements in Signaling Games”, Games and Economic Behavior, vol. 6, pp. 1-31.

Baye, M., D. Kovenock, and G. de Vries (1996). “The All-Pay Auction with Complete Information”, Economic Theory, vol. 8, pp. 91-105.

Baye, M. and J. Morgan (2002). “Price Dispersion on the Lab and on the Internet: Theory and Evidence”, Rand Journal of Economics (forthcoming).

Brandts, J. and C. Holt (1992). “An Experimental Test of Equilibrium Dominance in Signalling Games”, American Economic Review, vol. 82, pp. 1350-1365.

Brown, J. and R. Rosenthal (1990). “Testing the Minimax Hypothesis: A Re-examination of O´Neill´s Game Experiment”, Econometrica, vol. 58, pp. 1065-1081.

Camerer, C. and K. Weigelt (1990). “Experimental Test of a Sequential Equilibrium Reputation Model”, Econometrica, vol. 56, pp. 1-36.

Chen, Hsiao-Chi, J. Friedman, and J. Thisse (1997). “Boundedly Rational Nash Equilibrium: A Probabilistic Choice Approach”, Games and Economic Behavior, vol. 18, pp. 32-54.

Desgrupta, P. (1986). “The Theory of Technological Competition”, in M. Stiglitz and G. Mathewson (eds.), New Developments in the Analysis of Market Structure, Cambridge, The MIT Press, pp. 519-547.

Desgrupta, P. and E. Maskin (1986). “The Existence of Equilibrium in Discontinuous Economic Games, 2: Applications”, Review of Economic Studies, vol. 53, pp. 1-41.

Davis, D. and C. Holt (1994). “Market Power and Merger in Laboratory Markets with Posted Prices”, Rand Journal Economics, 25(3), pp. 467-487.

Davis, D. and C. Holt (1990). “The Effects of Non-Binding Price Announcements in Posted-Offer Markets”, Economic Letters, vol. 34, pp. 307-310.

Debreu, G. (1960). “Review of R&D Luce Individual Choice Bahavior”, American Economic Review, vol. 50, pp. 186-188.

Harsanyi, J. (1973). “Games with Randomly Disturbed Payoffs: A New Rationale for Mixed Strategy Equilibrium Points”, International Journal of Game Theory, vol. 2, pp. 1-13.

Hendricks, K. et al. (1988). “The War of Attrition in Continuous Time with Complete Information”, International Economic Review, vol. 3, pp. 663-680.

Holt, C. (1993). “Industrial Organization: A Survey of Laboratory Research”, in J. Kagel and A. Roth (eds.), Handbook of Experimental Economics, Princeton, Princeton University Press.

Kruse, J. et al. (1994). “Bertrand-Edgeworth Competition in Experimental Markets”, Econometrica, vol. 62, pp. 343-371.

López-Acevedo, G. (1997). “Quantal Response Equilibrium for Posted-Offer Markets”, Estudios Económicos, El Colegio de México, vol. 12. No. 2.

López-Acevedo, G. (1996). Equilibrium Behavior in an All-Pay Auction with Complete Information, DPS, No. 9607, ITAM.

López-Acevedo, G. (1995). Quantal Response Equilibrium for Posted-Offer Markets, Ph. D. dissertation, University of Virginia.

Luce, R. (1959). Individual Choice Behavior: A Theoretical Analysis, New York, Wiley.

McAfee, P. and J. McMillan (1987). “Auctions and Bidding”, Journal of Economic Literature, vol. 25, pp. 699-738.

McFadden, D. (1984). “Econometric Analysis of Qualitative Response Models”, in Z. Griliches and M. Intriligator (eds.), Handbook of Econometrics, vol. II, Amsterdam, Elsevier Science Publishing.

McKelvey, R. and T. Palfrey (1995). “Quantal Response Equilibria for Normal Form Games”, Games and Economic Behavior, vol. 10, pp. 6-38.

McKelvey, R. and T. Palfrey (1992). “An Experimental Study of the Centipede Game”, Econometrica, vol. 60, No. 4, pp. 803-836.

McKelvey, R. and T. Palfrey (1990). An Experimental Study of the Centipede Game, SSWP 732, Division of Humanities and Social Science, California Institute of Technology.

Milgrom, P. and R. Weber (1975) “A Theory of Auctions and Competitive Bidding”, Econometrica, vol. 50, pp. 1089-1122.

Moulin, H. (1986). Game Theory of the Social Sciences, NY, New York University Press, 2nd ed.

Palfrey, T. and H. Rosenthal (1992). Repeated Play, Cooperation and Coordination: An Experimental Study, SSWP 785, California Institute of Technology.

Palfrey, T. and H. Rosenthal (1991). “Testing Game-Theoretic Models of Free Riding: New Evidence of Probability Bias and Learning”, in T. Palfrey (ed.), Laboratory Research in Political Economy, Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press.

Rogerson, W. (1982). “The Social Costs of Monopoly and Regulation: a Game Theoretical Analysis”, Bell Journal of Economics, vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 391-401.

Snyder, J. (1989). “Election Goals and the Allocation of Campaign Resources”, Econometrica, vol. 57, No. 3, pp. 637-660.

Stahl, D. O. and P. Wilson (1993). “Experimental Evidence on Players´ Models of Other Players”, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organizations, vol. 25, pp. 309-327.

Thurstone L. (1927). “A Law of Comparative Judgement”, Psychology Review, vol. 34, pp. 273-286.

Tversky, A. (1972a). “Choice by Elimination: A Theory of Choice”, Journal of Mathematical Psychology, vol. 79, pp. 341-367.

Tversky, A. (1972b). “Elimination by Aspects: A Theory of Choice”, Psychology Review, vol. 79, pp. 281-294.

Published
01-01-2004
How to Cite
López AcevedoG. (2004). Equilibrium behavior in all-pay auction with complete information. Estudios Económicos, 19(1), 93-124. https://doi.org/10.24201/ee.v19i1.177
  • Abstract viewed - 343 times
  • PDF downloaded: 134 times