D.5 Dominant strategies and Nash equilibrium | Game Theory - Microeconomics

Learn more: www.policonomic...
This video explains how dominant strategies work, and how to reach a Nash equilibrium. We start by analysing dominant strategies, then explain what the Nash equilibrium is. Finally, we show an example of elimination of dominated strategies.
Related videos:
-Battle of the Bismarck Sea: • D.4 Battle of the Bism...
-Prisoner's dilemma: • D.3 Prisoner's dilemma...
Related articles:
-Dominant strategies: www.policonomic...
-Battle of the Bismarck Sea: www.policonomic...
Thank you for watching!
www.policonomic...
Learn, and enjoy!

[@TimoKvapil]

guess who wont be choosing economics in further semesters

[@築夢者-w8o]

I think there's something wrong, you shouldn't add up the values when prisoner 1 choose confess and add up the values when prisoner 1 choose lie then compare the two. You should simply see what prisoner 1 will choose when prisoner 2 choose confess, and then see what prisoner 1 will choose when prisoner 2 choose lie. You can't add up the values and say prisoner 1 will choose confess without considering prisoner 2's choice. Although it seems the same in this example, it may be different in others.

[@jwhoward182]

They are trying to convey is the Nash equilibrium and dynamic equilibrium, the example of confess/lie is flawed in its assignment of scoring.

[@idowuojo4826]

I appreciate the attempt but the addition of the pay off is throwing me off. Why add them?

[@zigman45]

get rid of these negatives, very confusing

[@seanybo777]

Constructively there is some snippets of wrong information in this video which should be addressed within the video as some people will be relying on these for revision whilst in Uni or school etc, this is a good channel but this isn't a great video find a different one students!

[@uduhuzoma8532]

Why should prisoner 1 get -8 or 0? What are the assumptions of this example? To me,this video is not well analyzed.

[@petertosh7334]

The Nash Equilibrium for the second question is 1 and - 1

[@InCaseofEconStruggles]

The addition is definitely not super helpful here. I will say negatives make sense for the prisoner's dilemma if you think of the "payoffs" as something like "years in jail" or "size of the fine you receive" where you want the smallest negative numbers, but the payoffs are all bad and you are trying to get the least bad outcome. That is pretty common for the Prisoner's Dilemma.

[@karthik123able]

2 things, there is no need for negatives as it would likely throw off beginners. Secondly, you do not need to add those values, it is basically which prisoners choose what and the Nash equilibrium is the best option for both. Thank you

[@tiffanie5012]

thanks for your explanation, it was really clear :)