Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2504.01280

Matching, Unanticipated Experiences, Divorce, Flirting, Rematching, Etc

Abstract

We study dynamic decentralized two-sided matching in which players may encounter unanticipated experiences. As they become aware of these experiences, they may change their preferences over players on the other side of the market. Consequently, they may get ``divorced'' and rematch again with other agents, which may lead to further unanticipated experiences etc. A matching is stable if there is absence of pairwise common belief in blocking. Stable matchings can be destabilized by unanticipated experiences. Yet, we show that there exist self-confirming outcomes that are stable and do not lead to further unanticipated experiences. We introduce a natural decentralized matching process that, at each period assigns probability $1 - \varepsilon$ to the satisfaction of a mutual optimal blocking pair (if it exists) and picks any optimal blocking pair otherwise. The parameter $\varepsilon$ is interpreted as a friction of the matching market. We show that for any decentralized matching process, frictions are necessary for convergence to stability even without unawareness. Our process converges to self-confirming stable outcomes. Further, we allow for bilateral communication/flirting that changes the awareness and say that a matching is flirt-proof stable if there is absence of communication leading to pairwise common belief in blocking. We show that our natural decentralized matching process converges to flirt-proof self-confirming outcomes.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Burkhard C. Schipper, Tina Danting Zhang. 2025-05-12. Matching, Unanticipated Experiences, Divorce, Flirting, Rematching, Etc. https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.01280

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Measurement of Trustworthiness of the Online Reviews

Online review platforms shape consumer decisions, yet reported ratings and comments may be unreliable when reviewers behave inconsistently. This paper models online reviews as a sequential choice problem and proposes a formal rationality pattern function that links a reviewer's current review to their revealed preference history. Building on a two-way consistency axiom for choices from nested sets, we derive an object-specific support trajectory and an associated degree measure in [0,1] (Average Propensity to Choose a Pattern, APCP) that quantifies review trustworthiness. The measure is designed to support information updating and reduce asymmetric information by discounting reviews that are inconsistent with past behavior. A worked example illustrates how the approach assigns trustworthiness grades to reviews for different objects and how these grades can complement aggregate rating statistics. Finally, a generalized theory has been established.

econ.TH

The Depth and Reach of Exploitation: Contracting with Endogenously Naive Consumers

Consumers can invest resources to understand and avoid their behavioral mistakes, and their incentives to do so depend on the market consequences of remaining naive. We incorporate this feedback between consumers' cognitive states and market outcomes into a general contracting model. Firms face a trade-off between the depth and reach of exploitation: deeper exploitation raises profit from a naive consumer but induces greater cognitive investment, promoting sophistication and shrinking the exploitable consumer base. This trade-off disciplines exploitation and can cause policies that benefit consumers when cognition is fixed to backfire when cognition is endogenous.

econ.TH

Contracting under Misspecification

This paper studies agency problems when both parties worry that the model linking action to output is misspecified. With observable actions, an optimal contract is linear in output, so performance pay arises solely to share misspecification exposure, the slope reflects the parties' relative robustness concerns, and its allocation is Pareto efficient. With hidden actions, this sharing rule survives and incentives add a nonlinear correction. Misspecification concerns can polarize effort by making intermediate actions impossible to implement. Moreover, ambiguity across competing models has asymmetric effects: uncertainty about desired actions raises the principal's payoff, whereas uncertainty about deviations can lower it.

econ.TH