Talk:Information asymmetry

Economics High‑importance

	Business and economics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Game theory High‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject Game theory, an attempt to improve, grow, and standardize Wikipedia's articles related to Game theory. We need your help! Join in \| Fix a red link \| Add content \| Weigh inGame theoryWikipedia:WikiProject Game theoryTemplate:WikiProject Game theorygame theory articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 January 2020 and 30 April 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mandobobafett.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 00:31, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

neo-classical economics which assumes perfect information[edit]

LOL! Someone really doesn't understand either classical or neo-classical economics 178.148.80.200 (talk) 23:57, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

imperfect information in game theory[edit]

Is there any relevance to imperfect information games as part of overall game theory here? Cowbert (talk) 04:37, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep CRETOG8(t/c) 03:16, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Contradiction[edit]

Near the beginning, the article states that buyers of life insurance know more than sellers. Near the end, it list life insurance as a case where sellers know more. I'm pretty sure the first is true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.57.220.248 (talk) 16:47, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sources[edit]

Source 5 (relating to the nobel prize in economics 2001) has a link that doesn't work anymore. I'd replace it myself but got stumped when I faced the wiki edit page. This link could do; (http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/2001/) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.210.195.90 (talk) 15:40, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

     Made the correction! Mandobobafett (talk) 16:14, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar problem resulting in nonsense[edit]

Someone who knows the material needs to fix this sentence in the lede: "Information asymmetries are studied in the context of principal–agent problems where they are a major cause of misinforming and is essential in every communication process." Is the verb "is" missing a proper subject(since the singular verb can't agree with the plural "asymmetries" or "they"), or should the verb "is" here simply be pluralized (to "are")?

Reorganized the page[edit]

Reorganized the page

1. Models 2. Adverse Selection 3. Signalling 4. Screening 5. Information gathering 6. Sources (changed the title to - Sources of Information Asymmetry) 7. Applications in Research Mandobobafett (talk) 21:16, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Added to the Applications in research section[edit]

Reorganize the the 'Application in research' section with the following subsections and elaborate on these subsections

1. Accounting and Finance 2. Effect of blogging 3. Game Theory 4. Artificial Intelligence 5. Management

Removed the 'Information asymmetry and artificial intelligence' section and incorporated it within the 'Application in research' section Removed the 'Effect of Blogging' section and incorporated it within its own subsection within the 'Application in research' section Mandobobafett (talk) 21:18, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Addition to the Screening subsection of Adverse Selection[edit]

Add to the 'Screening' subsection of the 'Adverse Selection' section. Specifically, wrote about 'counteracting institutions'.

Mandobobafett (talk) 21:19, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with the image[edit]

Reasons why File:Balance_of_Power_Graph.jpg is a bad image for the lead of this article: 1) viewing the page with a blue-light filter, it's hard to read; 2) poor English: apostrophes are missing; 3) it illustrates balance, not asymmetry; 4) It's so abstract and schematic it doesn't help the reader understand how a market where the different participants have the same information functions well, or what an information asymmetry in a market is; 5) It seems to be a photograph of something which at least ought to be a screen-capture or better still an SVG. MartinPoulter (talk) 22:58, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]