« Back to Results

Learning and Information Aggregation with Misspecified Models

Paper Session

Friday, Jan. 4, 2019 8:00 AM - 10:00 AM

Atlanta Marriott Marquis, International 1
Hosted By: Econometric Society
  • Chair: Muhamet Yildiz, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Misinterpreting Others and the Fragility of Social Learning

Mira Frick
,
Yale University
Ryota Iijima
,
Yale University
Yuhta Ishii
,
Technological Autonomous University of Mexico (ITAM)

Abstract

We study to what extent information aggregation in social learning environments is robust to slight misperceptions of others' characteristics (e.g., tastes or risk attitudes). We consider a population of agents who obtain information about the state of the world both from initial private signals and by observing a random sample of other agents' actions over time, where agents' actions depend not only on their beliefs about the state but also on their idiosyncratic types. When agents are correct about the type distribution in the population, they learn the true state in the long run. By contrast, our first main result shows that even arbitrarily small amounts of misperception can generate extreme breakdowns of information aggregation, where in the long run all agents incorrectly assign probability 1 to some fixed state of the world, regardless of the true underlying state. This stark discontinuous departure from the correctly specified benchmark motivates independent analysis of information aggregation under misperception. Our second main result shows that any misperception of the type distribution gives rise to a specific failure of information aggregation where agents' long-run beliefs and behavior vary only coarsely with the state, and we provide systematic predictions for how the nature of misperception shapes these coarse long-run outcomes. Finally, we show that how sensitive information aggregation is to misperception depends on how rich agents' payoff-relevant uncertainty is. A design implication is that information aggregation can be improved through interventions aimed at simplifying the agents' learning environment.

Divisible Updating

Martin Cripps
,
University College London

Abstract

A characterisation is provided of the belief updating processes that are independent of how an individual chooses to divide up/partition the statistical information they use in their updating. These "divisible” updating processes are in general not Bayesian, but can be interpreted as a reparameterisation of Bayesian updating. This class of rules incorporates over- and under-reaction to new information in the updating and other biases. We also show that a martingale property is, then, sufficient for the updating process to be Bayesian.

The Cost of Information

Luciano Pomatto
,
California Institute of Technology
Philipp Strack
,
University of California-Berkeley
Omer Tamuz
,
California Institute of Technology

Abstract

We develop an axiomatic theory of costly information acquisition. Our axioms
capture the idea of constant marginal costs in information production: the cost of generating two independent signals is the sum of their costs, and the cost of generating a signal with probability half equals half the cost of generating it deterministically. Together with a monotonicity and a continuity conditions, these axioms completely determine the cost of a signal up to a vector of parameters, one for each pair of states of nature. These parameters have a clear economic interpretation and determine the difficulty of distinguishing between different states. The resulting cost function, which we call log-likelihood ratio cost, is a linear combinations of the Kullback-Leibler divergences (i.e., the expected log-likelihood ratios) between the conditional signal distributions. We argue that this cost function is a versatile modeling tool, and that in various examples of information acquisition it leads to more realistic predictions than the approach based on Shannon entropy.

The Wisdom of the Confused Crowd

George Mailath
,
University of Pennsylvania and Australian National University
Larry Samuelson
,
Yale University

Abstract

“Crowds” are often regarded as “wiser” than individuals, and prediction markets are often regarded as effective methods for harnessing this wisdom. If the agents in prediction markets are Bayesians who share a common model and prior belief, then the no-trade theorem implies that we should see no trade in the market. But if the agents in the market are not Bayesians who share a common model and prior belief, then it is no longer obvious that the market outcome aggregates or conveys information. In this paper, we examine a stylized prediction market comprised of Bayesian agents whose inferences are based on different models of the underlying environment. We explore a basic tension—the differences in models that give rise to the possibility of trade preclude generally the possibility of perfect information aggregation.
Discussant(s)
Philipp Strack
,
University of California-Berkeley
Alvaro Sandroni
,
Northwestern University
Muhamet Yildiz
,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
JEL Classifications
  • C7 - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory
  • D8 - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty