Elsevier

Games and Economic Behavior

Volume 73, Issue 2, November 2011, Pages 517-537
Games and Economic Behavior

Voronoi languages: Equilibria in cheap-talk games with high-dimensional types and few signals

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geb.2011.03.008Get rights and content

Abstract

We study a communication game of common interest in which the sender observes one of infinite types and sends one of finite messages which is interpreted by the receiver. In equilibrium there is no full separation but types are clustered into contiguous cells. We give a full characterization of the strict Nash equilibria of this game as Voronoi languages. As the strategy set is infinite static stability concepts for finite games such as ESS are no longer sufficient for Lyapunov stability in the replicator dynamics. We give examples of unstable strict Nash equilibria and stable inefficient Voronoi languages. We derive efficient Voronoi languages with a large number of words and numerically illustrate stability of some Voronoi languages with large message spaces and non-uniformly distributed types.

Highlights

► We study a communication game with infinite types and finite messages. ► Strict Nash equilibria of this game are Voronoi languages and vice versa. ► There are strict but unstable and stable but inefficient Nash equilibria. ► We illustrate stability of some languages with non-uniform types and many messages.

References (33)

  • A. Robson

    Efficiency in evolutionary games: Darwin, Nash, and the secret handshake

    J. Theoretical Biol.

    (1990)
  • K. Wärneryd

    Cheap talk, coordination and evolutionary stability

    Games Econ. Behav.

    (1993)
  • Agranov, M., Schotter, A., 2008. Ambiguity and vagueness in the announcement (Bernanke) game: an experimental study of...
  • R. Anderson et al.

    Genericity with Infinitely Many Parameters

    (2001)
  • Azrieli, Y., 2009. Characterization of multidimensional spatial models of elections with a valence dimension. Working...
  • N.P. Bhatia et al.

    Stability Theory of Dynamical Systems

    (1970)
  • Cited by (44)

    • Fragile meaning - an experiment

      2024, Journal of Economic Theory
    • Communication between unbiased agents

      2023, Games and Economic Behavior
    • Failure of common knowledge of language in common-interest communication games

      2018, Games and Economic Behavior
      Citation Excerpt :

      Thus, when there is high probability that the receiver assigns high probability to some language type (which may vary with the language state), the expected payoff gain from making the sender's language type common knowledge would be insignificant. I have focused on limited message availability both because of the precedents in the literature on communication games (e.g. Jäger et al., 2011; Crémer et al., 2007; and Sobel, 2015) and because it expresses natural constraints on sender strategies that might be implied by unfamiliarity with an organizational code or a foreign language. Other constraints worth investigating include commitments to specific maps from payoff states into messages and actions resulting, for example, from conflicting externally given language uses.

    • Finite languages, persuasion bias, and opinion fluctuations

      2018, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization
      Citation Excerpt :

      This may be due to conflicts between individuals similar to the cheap talk framework of Crawford and Sobel (1982).2 But it may as well be simply because people only understand finitely many words and use them differently depending on their cultural background, vocabulary knowledge and personal taste, while the information to communicate is a much more complex object, see Blume and Board (2013), Cremer et al. (2007), and Jäger et al. (2011). A more concrete example are financial markets where agents often report stock ratings (evaluations of a stock’s expected performance and risk level) according to a finite rating scale and may use the scale differently.

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    We would like to thank Joseph Hofbauer from University of Vienna and the audiences of the North American Summer Meeting of the Econometric Society in Boston, 2009, the annual meeting of the German Economic Association in Magdeburg, 2009, and the economic seminars at TU Dortmund and Max-Planck-Institute for Economics, Jena, for their comments. The feedback that we received from the audience of the workshop “Game Theory and Communication: Prospects and Syntheses” at Stanford University, especially Chris Pottʼs detailed commentary, were also very helpful. The research that led to this paper has been supported by project A6 of the CRC 673 “Alignment in Communication” and by the International Research Training Group EBIM (“Economic Behavior and Interaction Models”), both of the German Research Foundation, DFG, which is gratefully acknowledged.

    View full text