The Experts below are selected from a list of 162 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Karl Shell - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
2004) “Comparing Sunspot Equilibrium and Lottery Equilibrium Allocations: The Finite Case
2014Co-Authors: Rod Garratt, Todd Keister, Karl ShellAbstract:Sunspot equilibrium and lottery equilibrium are two stochastic solution concepts for nonstochastic economies. Recent work by Garratt, Keister, Qin, and Shell (in press) and Kehoe, Levine, and Prescott (in press) on nonconvex exchange economies has shown that when the Randomizing Device is continuous, applying the two concepts to the same fundamental economy yields the same set of equilibrium allocations. In the present paper, we examine economies based on a discrete Randomizing Device. We extend the lottery model so that it can constrain the randomization possibilities available to agents in the same way that the sunspots model can. Every equilibrium allocation of our generalized lottery model has a corresponding sunspot equilibrium allocation. For almost all discrete Randomizing Devices, the converse is also true. There are exceptions, however: for some Randomizing Devices, there exist sunspot equilibrium allocations with no lottery equilibrium counterpart
-
Comparing sunspot equilibrium and lottery equilibrium allocations: the finite case
2004Co-Authors: Rod Garratt, Todd Keister, Karl ShellAbstract:Sunspot equilibrium and lottery equilibrium are two stochastic solution concepts for nonstochastic economies. Recent work by Garratt, Keister, Qin, and Shell [5] and Kehoe, Levine, and Prescott [8] on nonconvex exchange economies has shown that when the Randomizing Device is continuous, applying the two concepts to the same fundamental economy yields the same set of equilibrium allocations. In the present paper, we examine economies based on a discrete Randomizing Device. We extend the lottery model so that it can constrain the randomization possibilities available to agents in the same way that the sunspots model can. Every equilibrium allocation of our generalized lottery model has a corresponding sunspot equilibrium allocation. For almost all discrete Randomizing Devices, the converse is also true. There are exceptions, however: for some Randomizing Devices, there exist sunspot equilibrium allocations with no lottery equilibrium counterpart
-
Comparing sunspot equilibrium and lottery equilibrium allocations: the finite case
2004Co-Authors: Rod Garratt, Todd Keister, Karl ShellAbstract:Sunspot equilibrium and lottery equilibrium are two stochastic solution concepts for nonstochastic economies. Recent work by Garratt, Keister, Qin, and Shell (in press) and Kehoe, Levine, and Prescott (in press) on nonconvex exchange economies has shown that when the Randomizing Device is continuous, applying the two concepts to the same fundamental economy yields the same set of equilibrium allocations. In the present paper, we examine economies based on a discrete Randomizing Device. We extend the lottery model so that it can constrain the randomization possibilities available to agents in the same way that the sunspots model can. Every equilibrium allocation of our generalized lottery model has a corresponding sunspot equilibrium allocation. For almost all discrete Randomizing Devices, the converse is also true. There are exceptions, however: for some Randomizing Devices, there exist sunspot equilibrium allocations with no lottery equilibrium counterpart. Correspondence
-
Comparing Sunspot Equilibrium and Lottery Equilibrium Allocations: The Finite Case
Research Papers in Economics, 2002Co-Authors: Rod Garratt, Todd Keister, Karl ShellAbstract:Sunspot equilibrium and lottery equilibrium are two stochastic solution concepts for nonstochastic economies. Recent work by Garratt, Keister, Qin, and Shell (in press) and Kehoe, Levine, and Prescott (in press) on nonconvex exchange economies has shown that when the Randomizing Device is continuous, applying the two concepts to the same fundamental economy yields the same set of equilibrium allocations. In the present paper, we examine economies based on a discrete Randomizing Device. We extend the lottery model so that it can constrain the randomization possibilities available to agents in the same way that the sunspots model can. Every equilibrium allocation of our generalized lottery model has a corresponding sunspot equilibrium allocation. For almost all discrete Randomizing Devices, the converse is also true. There are exceptions, however: for some Randomizing Devices, there exist sunspot equilibrium allocations with no lottery equilibrium counterpart.
-
Rationing and sunspot equilibria
1994Co-Authors: Aditya Goenka, Karl ShellAbstract:Summary. A sunspot equilibrium (SSE) is based on some extrinsic Randomizing Device (RD). We analyze the robustness of SSE. (1) We say that an SSE allocation is robust to refinements if it is also an SSE allocation based on any refinement of its RD. (2) We introduce two core concepts for analyzing the robustness of SSE in the face of cooperative-coalition formation. Inthe first, the blocking allocations are based on the RD that defines the SSE. In the second (stronger) core concept, coalitions select their own RDs. For the convex economy with restricted market participation, SSE allocations are robust under each of the definitions and the cores converge on replication of the economy to the set of SSE allocations. For the economy with an indivisible good, SSE allocations are not always robust. We provide examples of each of the following: (i) an SSE allocation that is not robust to refinement, (ii) an SSE allocation that is in neither core, (iii) an SSE allocation that is in the first core, but not in the second, and (iv) a core that does not converge upon replication to the set of SSE allocations
Ulf Böckenholt - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Accounting for self-protective responses in randomized response data from a social security survey using the zero-inflated Poisson model
The Annals of Applied Statistics, 2008Co-Authors: Maarten Cruyff, Ardo Van Den Hout, Ulf Böckenholt, Peter G. M. Van Der HeijdenAbstract:In 2004 the Dutch Department of Social Affairs conducted a survey to assess the extent of noncompliance with social security regulations. The survey was conducted among 870 recipients of social security benefits and included a series of sensitive questions about regulatory noncompliance. Due to the sensitive nature of the questions the randomized response design was used. Although randomized response protects the privacy of the respondent, it is unlikely that all respondents followed the design. In this paper we introduce a model that allows for respondents displaying self-protective response behavior by consistently giving the nonincriminating response, irrespective of the outcome of the Randomizing Device. The dependent variable denoting the total number of incriminating responses is assumed to be generated by the application of randomized response to a latent Poisson variable denoting the true number of rule violations. Since self-protective responses result in an excess of observed zeros in relation to the Poisson randomized response distribution, these are modeled as observed zero-inflation. The model includes predictors of the Poisson parameters, as well as predictors of the probability of self-protective response behavior.
-
Log-Linear Randomized-Response Models Taking Self-Protective Response Behavior Into Account
Sociological Methods & Research, 2007Co-Authors: Maarten Cruyff, Ardo Van Den Hout, Peter G. M. Van Der Heijden, Ulf BöckenholtAbstract:Randomized response (RR) is an interview technique designed to eliminate response bias when sensitive questions are asked. In RR the answer depends partly on the true status of the respondent and partly on the outcome of a Randomizing Device. Although RR elicits more honest answers than direct questions do, it is susceptible to self-protective response behavior; that is, the respondent gives an evasive answer irrespective of the outcome of the Randomizing Device. The authors present a log-linear RR model that accounts for this kind of self-protection (SP). The main results of this SP model are estimates of (1) the probability of SP, (2) the log-linear parameters describing the associations between the sensitive characteristics, and (3) the prevalence of the sensitive characteristics that are corrected for SP. The model is illustrated with two examples from a Dutch survey measuring noncompliance with social welfare rules.
-
ACCOUNTING FOR SELF-PROTECTIVE RESPONSES IN RANDOMIZED RESPONSE DATA FROM A SOCIAL SECURITY SURVEY USING THE ZERO-INFLATED POISSON MODEL
2026Co-Authors: Ulf Böckenholt, Ardo Van DenAbstract:to assess the extent of noncompliance with social security regulations. The survey was conducted among 870 recipients of social security benefits and included a series of sensitive questions about regulatory noncompliance. Due to the sensitive nature of the questions the randomized response design was used. Although randomized response protects the privacy of the respondent, it is unlikely that all respondents followed the design. In this paper we introduce a model that allows for respondents displaying self-protective response behavior by consistently giving the nonincriminating response, irrespective of the outcome of the Randomizing Device. The dependent variable denoting the total number of incriminating responses is assumed to be generated by the application of randomized response to a latent Poisson variable denoting the true number of rule violations. Since self-protective responses result in an excess of observed zeros in relation to the Poisson randomized response distribution, these are modeled as observed zero-inflation. The model includes predictors of the Poisson parameters, as well as predictors of the probability of self-protective response behavior
Mostafa Beshkar - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
optimal remedies in international trade agreements
Social Science Research Network, 2010Co-Authors: Mostafa BeshkarAbstract:This paper takes a mechanism-design approach to characterize a politically optimal trade agreement under the assumption that governments have private information about the fluctuating political pressure they face from domestic interest groups to restrict trade. The optimal mechanism under these changing circumstances involves a remedy system for breach of trade agreements that specifies less-than-proportional retaliations against deviating parties. This result is in contrast to the conventional wisdom in the literature regarding the efficiency of the Reciprocity Principle as a rule of renegotiation in trade agreements. I also consider an institutional structure in which only commensurate retaliations are practical but governments can employ a public Randomizing Device to authorize retaliations. I show that it is optimal to authorize retaliations only randomly. This suggests a role for the WTO dispute settlement process as a public Randomizing Device.
Maarten Cruyff - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Accounting for self-protective responses in randomized response data from a social security survey using the zero-inflated Poisson model
The Annals of Applied Statistics, 2008Co-Authors: Maarten Cruyff, Ardo Van Den Hout, Ulf Böckenholt, Peter G. M. Van Der HeijdenAbstract:In 2004 the Dutch Department of Social Affairs conducted a survey to assess the extent of noncompliance with social security regulations. The survey was conducted among 870 recipients of social security benefits and included a series of sensitive questions about regulatory noncompliance. Due to the sensitive nature of the questions the randomized response design was used. Although randomized response protects the privacy of the respondent, it is unlikely that all respondents followed the design. In this paper we introduce a model that allows for respondents displaying self-protective response behavior by consistently giving the nonincriminating response, irrespective of the outcome of the Randomizing Device. The dependent variable denoting the total number of incriminating responses is assumed to be generated by the application of randomized response to a latent Poisson variable denoting the true number of rule violations. Since self-protective responses result in an excess of observed zeros in relation to the Poisson randomized response distribution, these are modeled as observed zero-inflation. The model includes predictors of the Poisson parameters, as well as predictors of the probability of self-protective response behavior.
-
Log-Linear Randomized-Response Models Taking Self-Protective Response Behavior Into Account
Sociological Methods & Research, 2007Co-Authors: Maarten Cruyff, Ardo Van Den Hout, Peter G. M. Van Der Heijden, Ulf BöckenholtAbstract:Randomized response (RR) is an interview technique designed to eliminate response bias when sensitive questions are asked. In RR the answer depends partly on the true status of the respondent and partly on the outcome of a Randomizing Device. Although RR elicits more honest answers than direct questions do, it is susceptible to self-protective response behavior; that is, the respondent gives an evasive answer irrespective of the outcome of the Randomizing Device. The authors present a log-linear RR model that accounts for this kind of self-protection (SP). The main results of this SP model are estimates of (1) the probability of SP, (2) the log-linear parameters describing the associations between the sensitive characteristics, and (3) the prevalence of the sensitive characteristics that are corrected for SP. The model is illustrated with two examples from a Dutch survey measuring noncompliance with social welfare rules.
Peter G. M. Van Der Heijden - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Accounting for self-protective responses in randomized response data from a social security survey using the zero-inflated Poisson model
The Annals of Applied Statistics, 2008Co-Authors: Maarten Cruyff, Ardo Van Den Hout, Ulf Böckenholt, Peter G. M. Van Der HeijdenAbstract:In 2004 the Dutch Department of Social Affairs conducted a survey to assess the extent of noncompliance with social security regulations. The survey was conducted among 870 recipients of social security benefits and included a series of sensitive questions about regulatory noncompliance. Due to the sensitive nature of the questions the randomized response design was used. Although randomized response protects the privacy of the respondent, it is unlikely that all respondents followed the design. In this paper we introduce a model that allows for respondents displaying self-protective response behavior by consistently giving the nonincriminating response, irrespective of the outcome of the Randomizing Device. The dependent variable denoting the total number of incriminating responses is assumed to be generated by the application of randomized response to a latent Poisson variable denoting the true number of rule violations. Since self-protective responses result in an excess of observed zeros in relation to the Poisson randomized response distribution, these are modeled as observed zero-inflation. The model includes predictors of the Poisson parameters, as well as predictors of the probability of self-protective response behavior.
-
Log-Linear Randomized-Response Models Taking Self-Protective Response Behavior Into Account
Sociological Methods & Research, 2007Co-Authors: Maarten Cruyff, Ardo Van Den Hout, Peter G. M. Van Der Heijden, Ulf BöckenholtAbstract:Randomized response (RR) is an interview technique designed to eliminate response bias when sensitive questions are asked. In RR the answer depends partly on the true status of the respondent and partly on the outcome of a Randomizing Device. Although RR elicits more honest answers than direct questions do, it is susceptible to self-protective response behavior; that is, the respondent gives an evasive answer irrespective of the outcome of the Randomizing Device. The authors present a log-linear RR model that accounts for this kind of self-protection (SP). The main results of this SP model are estimates of (1) the probability of SP, (2) the log-linear parameters describing the associations between the sensitive characteristics, and (3) the prevalence of the sensitive characteristics that are corrected for SP. The model is illustrated with two examples from a Dutch survey measuring noncompliance with social welfare rules.