English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This paper studies the evolution of conventions in Stag Hunt games when agents’ behaviour depends on pairwise payoff comparisons. The results of two imitative decision rules are compared with each other and with those obtained when agents myopically best respond to the distribution of play. These rules differ in terms of their rationale, their requirements, and the extent to which they make individuals learn from others. Depending on payoffs and the interaction process being considered, best response learning can cause either the rewarding All Stag equilibrium or the inefficient All Hare equilibrium to emerge as the long-run convention. In contrast, pairwise imitation favours the emergence of the Pareto-inferior equilibrium. This result is robust to assuming assortative matching and some heterogeneity in decision rules.

Pairwise imitation and evolution of the social contract