<p>It's basically what Keynes called the «<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_beauty_contest" rel="nofollow noreferrer">beauty contest</a>». Back then the newspaper offered rewards to the person that was able to guess who where the pretiest girls (determined by the poll). 
My english is bad (french student). hope i was a little help. </p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-03-12T03:36:05.707Z
2019-03-12T06:18:05.290Z
2019-03-12T06:18:05.290Z
alek racicot
<p><strong>Epistemic game theory</strong> would be the closest (sub-)field that deals with questions involving higher order beliefs among interacting agents. </p>

<p>The <a href="http://faculty.wcas.northwestern.edu/~msi661/EpistemicGameTheory-131120.pdf" rel="noreferrer">introductory article by Dekel and Siniscalchi</a> is a good entry point to the literature. From its introduction:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Epistemic game theory formalizes assumptions about rationality and mutual beliefs in a formal language, then studies their behavioral implications in games. Specifically, it asks: what do different notions of rationality and different assumptions about what players believe about ... what others believe about the rationality of players imply regarding play in a game?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>"<a href="https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemic-game/" rel="noreferrer">Epistemic Foundations of Game Theory</a>" on the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy has a less technical introduction. </p>

<p>There is also a strand of literature in <strong>behavioral economics</strong> that studies cognitive hierarchies. The theories there are developed mostly to explain behaviors in the lab settings. <a href="https://econweb.ucsd.edu/~vcrawfor/CCGIJEL13.pdf" rel="noreferrer">Crawford, Costa-Gomes, and Iriberri (2013)</a> provide a good summary. </p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-03-08T03:40:59.753Z
2019-03-08T03:40:59.753Z
Herr K.
<p>For a study in the adoption of new technology, a student and I are developing a questionnaire that will poll domain experts on their opinions of what their <em>colleagues</em> would think about benefits/drawbacks of adopting a particular technology. This is research in social science/business but not strictly game theory, and as we are not economists, we don't know the literature.</p>

<p>Have economists/game theorists investigated questions of the type <em>What do you think other people would think</em>? If several experts can, say, draw technology acceptance distribution functions that reflect their own beliefs about the community's attitude toward a particular strength or weakness of a new technology, then the geometrical average of those distribution functions could be a starting point for inquiry into ranking the relative importance of a set of several strengths and weaknesses. Has this been done before? By whom?</p>

<p>We are not asking for a tutorial here, just a pointer to where should we should start looking for prior art.</p>

<hr>

<p>Full disclosure: I asked this question on SE/Psychology and Neuroscience and did not receive meaningful answers.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-03-08T08:47:43.953Z
You might want to consider the [Keynesian beauty contest](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_beauty_contest)
Henry
<reference-request><game-theory><bayesian-game>
Questions of the type "What do you think other people would think?"
Peter Leopold
# Questions of the type "What do you think other people would think?"

(Asked by: username_0 on 2019-03-08)

For a study in the adoption of new technology, a student and I are developing a questionnaire that will poll domain experts on their opinions of what their *colleagues* would think about benefits/drawbacks of adopting a particular technology. This is research in social science/business but not strictly game theory, and as we are not economists, we don't know the literature.

Have economists/game theorists investigated questions of the type *What do you think other people would think*? If several experts can, say, draw technology acceptance distribution functions that reflect their own beliefs about the community's attitude toward a particular strength or weakness of a new technology, then the geometrical average of those distribution functions could be a starting point for inquiry into ranking the relative importance of a set of several strengths and weaknesses. Has this been done before? By whom?

We are not asking for a tutorial here, just a pointer to where should we should start looking for prior art.

---

Full disclosure: I asked this question on SE/Psychology and Neuroscience and did not receive meaningful answers.

**Tags:** reference-request, game-theory, bayesian-game

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: You might want to consider the [Keynesian beauty contest](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_beauty_contest)  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2019-03-08. Score: 7 | Accepted answer

**Epistemic game theory** would be the closest (sub-)field that deals with questions involving higher order beliefs among interacting agents.

The [introductory article by Dekel and Siniscalchi](http://faculty.wcas.northwestern.edu/~msi661/EpistemicGameTheory-131120.pdf) is a good entry point to the literature. From its introduction:

> Epistemic game theory formalizes assumptions about rationality and mutual beliefs in a formal language, then studies their behavioral implications in games. Specifically, it asks: what do different notions of rationality and different assumptions about what players believe about ... what others believe about the rationality of players imply regarding play in a game?

"[Epistemic Foundations of Game Theory](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemic-game/)" on the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy has a less technical introduction.

There is also a strand of literature in **behavioral economics** that studies cognitive hierarchies. The theories there are developed mostly to explain behaviors in the lab settings. [Crawford, Costa-Gomes, and Iriberri (2013)](https://econweb.ucsd.edu/~vcrawfor/CCGIJEL13.pdf) provide a good summary.


---

### Answer by username_2 on 2019-03-12. Score: 3

It's basically what Keynes called the «[beauty contest](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_beauty_contest)». Back then the newspaper offered rewards to the person that was able to guess who where the pretiest girls (determined by the poll).
My english is bad (french student). hope i was a little help.


---

