The paper presents an intuitive explanation of the Cho and Kreps’ (1987) Intuitive Criterion, and the Banks and Sobel’s (1987) Divinity Criterion (also referred as D1-Criterion). We provide multiple examples in which students can understand, step-by-step, the two main phases involved in these refinement criteria. Furthermore, we present economic settings in which the Cho and Kreps’ (1987) Intuitive Criterion does not restrict the set of equilibria, while the Banks and Sobel’s (1987) Divinity Criterion help refine the set of admissible separating equilibria in signaling games.
Issues
Volume 6 (2012)
Volume 5 (2010)
Volume 4 (2009)
Volume 3 (2008)
Volume 2 (2007)
Volume 1 (2006)
Most Downloaded Articles
- United-Continental Merger by Carbaugh, Robert J and Ghosh, Koushik
- Market Power and the Lerner Index: A Classroom Experiment by Rojas, Christian
- Capacity-Constrained Monopoly by Baylis, Kathy and Perloff, Jeffrey M
- The Animated Hotelling Model by Switzer, David M
- Third-Degree Price Discrimination by Liu, Qihong and Serfes, Konstantinos
The Intuitive and Divinity Criterion: Interpretation and Step-by-Step Examples
Felix Munoz-Garcia / Ana Espinola-Arredondo
1Washington State University
1Washington State University
Citation Information: Journal of Industrial Organization Education. Volume 5, Issue 1, Pages 1–20, ISSN (Online) 1935-5041, DOI: 10.2202/1935-5041.1024, March 2011
Publication History:
- Published Online:
- 2011-03-21
Keywords: signaling games; refinement criteria; intuitive criterion; divinity criterion
Comments (0)