Economic Theory

, Volume 66, Issue 3, pp 747–761 | Cite as

Uniqueness, stability and comparative statics for two-person Bayesian games with strategic substitutes

  • Eddie DekelEmail author
  • Ady Pauzner
Research Article


This paper considers a class of two-player symmetric games of incomplete information with strategic substitutes. First, we provide sufficient conditions under which there is either a unique equilibrium which is stable (in the sense of best-reply dynamics) and symmetric or a unique (up to permutations) asymmetric equilibrium that is stable (together with an unstable symmetric equilibrium). Thus, (i) there is always a unique stable equilibrium, (ii) it is either symmetric or asymmetric, and hence, (iii) a very simple local condition—stability of the symmetric equilibrium (i.e., the slope of the best-response function at the symmetric equilibrium)—identifies which case applies. Using this, we provide a very simple sufficient condition on primitives for when the unique stable equilibrium is asymmetric (and similarly for when it is symmetric). Finally, we show that the conditions guaranteeing the uniqueness described above also yield novel comparative statics results for this class of games.


Uniqueness of equilibrium Stability Symmetry breaking Monotone comparative statics Strategic substitutes 

JEL Classification

C72 C78 D82 


  1. Acemoglu, D., Jensen, M.K.: Aggregate comparative statics. Games Econ. Behav. 81, 27–49 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amir, R., Garcia, F., Knauff, M.: Symmetry-breaking in two-player games via strategic substitutes and diagonal nonconcavity: a synthesis. J. Econ. Theory 145, 1968–1986 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amir, R.: R&D returns, market structure and research joint ventures. J. Inst. Theor. Econ. 156, 583–598 26(2), 445–469 (2000)Google Scholar
  4. Bagnoli, M., Bergstrom, T.: Log-concave probability and its applications. Econ. Theory 26(2), 445–469 (2005). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Becker, G.S.: Division of labor in households and families. In: Becker, G.S. (ed.) A Treatise on the Family, Chapter 2. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1993)Google Scholar
  6. Bulow, J.I., Geanakoplos, J.D., Klemperer, P.D.: Multimarket oligopoly: strategic substitutes and complements. J. Polit. Econ. 93(3), 488–511 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cournot, A.: Researches into the Mathematical Principles of the Theory of Wealth. McMillan, New York (1897)Google Scholar
  8. de Frutos, M.-A., Fabra, N.: Endogenous capacities and price competition: the role of demand uncertainty. CEPR D. P. 6096 (2007)Google Scholar
  9. Hadfield, G.K.: A coordination model of the sexual division of labor. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 40, 125–153 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hefti, A.: On the relationship between uniqueness and stability in sum-aggregative, symmetric and general differentiable games. Math. Soc. Sci. 80, 83–96 (2016a)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hefti, A.: Symmetric stability in symmetric games. Theor. Econ. Lett. 6, 488–493 (2016b)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hefti, A.: Equilibria in symmetric games: theory and applications. Theor. Econ. 12, 979–1002 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Matsuyama, K.: Symmetry-breaking. In: Blume, L., Durlauf, S. (eds.) The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 2nd edn. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke (2008)Google Scholar
  14. Milgrom, P., Roberts, J.: Rationalizibility, learning and equilibrium in games with strategic complements. Econometrica 58, 1255–1277 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Roy, S., Sabarwal, T.: Monotone comparative statics for games with strategic substitutes. J. Math. Econ. 46(5), 793–806 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Roy, S., Sabarwal, T.: Characterizing stability properties in games with strategic substitutes. Games Econ. Behav. 75, 337–353 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Vives, X.: Nash equilibrium with strategic complementarities. J. Math. Econ. 19, 305–321 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Zimper, A.: A fixed-point characterization of the dominance-solvability of lattice games with strategic substitutes. Int. J. Game Theory 36(1), 107–117 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Northwestern UniversityEvanstonUSA
  2. 2.Tel Aviv UniversityTel AvivIsrael
  3. 3.The Eitan Berglas School of EconomicsTel Aviv UniversityTel AvivIsrael

Personalised recommendations