TY - JOUR
T1 - Secure implementation experiments
T2 - Do strategy-proof mechanisms really work?
AU - Cason, Timothy N.
AU - Saijo, Tatsuyoshi
AU - Sjöström, Tomas
AU - Yamato, Takehiko
N1 - Funding Information:
✩ Research was partially supported by the Grant in Aid for Scientific Research 15310023 of the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture in Japan, a Tokyo Center for Economic Research Grant, a Japan Economic Research Foundation Grant, and a University Faculty Scholar award at Purdue University. * Corresponding author. Fax: +1 765 494 9658. E-mail addresses: cason@purdue.edu (T.N. Cason), saijo@iser.osaka-u.ac.jp (T. Saijo), tsjostrom@fas-econ.rutgers.edu (T. Sjöström), yamato@valdes.titech.ac.jp (T. Yamato).
PY - 2006/11
Y1 - 2006/11
N2 - Strategy-proofness, requiring that truth-telling is a dominant strategy, is a standard concept used in social choice theory. Saijo, Sjöström and Yamato [Saijo, T., Sjöström, T., Yamato, T., 2003. Secure implementation: Strategy-proof mechanisms reconsidered. Working paper 4-03-1. Department of Economics, Pennsylvania State University] argue that this concept has serious drawbacks. In particular, many strategy-proof mechanisms have a continuum of Nash equilibria, including equilibria other than dominant strategy equilibria. For only a subset of strategy-proof mechanisms do the set of Nash equilibria and the set of dominant strategy equilibria coincide. For example, this double coincidence occurs in the Groves mechanism when preferences are single-peaked. We report experiments using two strategy-proof mechanisms. One of them has a large number of Nash equilibria, but the other has a unique Nash equilibrium. We found clear differences in the rate of dominant strategy play between the two.
AB - Strategy-proofness, requiring that truth-telling is a dominant strategy, is a standard concept used in social choice theory. Saijo, Sjöström and Yamato [Saijo, T., Sjöström, T., Yamato, T., 2003. Secure implementation: Strategy-proof mechanisms reconsidered. Working paper 4-03-1. Department of Economics, Pennsylvania State University] argue that this concept has serious drawbacks. In particular, many strategy-proof mechanisms have a continuum of Nash equilibria, including equilibria other than dominant strategy equilibria. For only a subset of strategy-proof mechanisms do the set of Nash equilibria and the set of dominant strategy equilibria coincide. For example, this double coincidence occurs in the Groves mechanism when preferences are single-peaked. We report experiments using two strategy-proof mechanisms. One of them has a large number of Nash equilibria, but the other has a unique Nash equilibrium. We found clear differences in the rate of dominant strategy play between the two.
KW - Experiment
KW - Groves-Clarke
KW - Laboratory
KW - Learning
KW - Pivotal
KW - Secure implementation
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33749626315&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33749626315&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.geb.2005.12.007
DO - 10.1016/j.geb.2005.12.007
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:33749626315
SN - 0899-8256
VL - 57
SP - 206
EP - 235
JO - Games and Economic Behavior
JF - Games and Economic Behavior
IS - 2
ER -