Skip to main content Accessibility help

Comparing Models of Strategic Choice: The Role of Uncertainty and Signaling

  • Jonathan Wand (a1)


Testing the fit of competing equilibrium solutions to extensive form games crucially depends on assumptions about the distribution of player types. To illustrate the importance of these assumptions for differentiating standard statistical models of strategic choice, I draw on a game previously analyzed by Lewis and Schultz (2003). The differences that they highlight between a pair of perfect Bayesian equilibrium and quantal response equilibrium models are not produced by signaling and updating dynamics as claimed, but are instead produced by different assumptions about the distribution of player types. The method of analysis developed and the issues raised are applicable to a broad range of structural models of conflict and bargaining.



Hide All
Aragones, Enriqueta, and Palfrey, Thomas R. 2004. “The Effect of Candidate Quality on Electoral Equilibrium: An Experimental Study.” American Political Science Review 98: 7790.
Carson, Jamie L. 2003. “Strategic Interaction and Candidate Competition in U.S. House Elections: Empirical Applications of Probit and Strategic Probit Models.” Political Analysis 11: 368–80.
Carson, Jamie L. 2005. “Strategy, Selection, and Candidate Competition in U.S. House and Senate Elections.” Journal of Politics 67: 128.
Leblang, David. 2005. “To Devalue or to Defend? The Political Economy of Exchange Rate Policy.” International Studies Quarterly 47: 533559.
Lewis, Jeffrey, and Schultz, Kenneth. 2003. “Revealing Preferences: Empirical Estimation of a Crisis Bargaining Game with Incomplete Information.” Political Analysis 11: 345–67.
McKelvey, Richard, and Palfrey, Thomas. 1998. “Quantal Response Equilibria for Extensive Form Games.” Experimental Economics 1: 941.
Quinn, Kevin, and Westveld, Anton. 2004. “Bayesian Inference for Semi-parametric Quantal Response Equilibrium Models.” Paper presented at the 2004 Midwest Political Association meetings, Chicago, IL.
Signorino, Curtis S. 1999. “Strategic Interaction and the Statistical Analysis of International Conflict.” American Political Science Review 93: 279297.
Signorino, Curtis S. 2003. “Structure and Uncertainty in Discrete Choice Models.” Political Analysis 11: 316344.
Signorino, Curtis S., and Yilmaz, Kuzey. 2003. “Strategic Misspecification in Discrete Choice Models.” American Journal of Political Science 47: 551–66.
Tong, Y. L. 1990. The Multivariate Normal Distribution. New York: Springer-Verlag.
MathJax is a JavaScript display engine for mathematics. For more information see

Related content

Powered by UNSILO

Comparing Models of Strategic Choice: The Role of Uncertainty and Signaling

  • Jonathan Wand (a1)


Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.