https://t.co/7KwFSQN5E1

Our paper with @KermanToygar is now published in Theory and Decision! If you think ignoring connections between phenomena is always a bad thing — think again! Using info design, we show that this can make persuasion harder, and thus help elicit more information from the expert.

Vita Kreps International Student Prize in Game Theory - please consider applying! 📍 Deadline: 30 April https://t.co/xGKvK8OoZs

On my way to the Netherlands 🇳🇱 and will be super happy to see you all at #EEAESEM24 Congress https://t.co/ebGCXTdgFf and then at @earie_news conference

There I was revising an old project on information design with @RastislavRehak and had a chance to present a new project on confirmatory learning. That's great to have a coauthor and friend with a double affiliation :)

A week ago, I was delighted to visit the Center for Social and Economic Behaviour (C-SEB) at the University of Cologne and the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods in Bonn.

CTN Annual Workshop at @uni_corvinus in Budapest last week was great: just two days, but so many interesting talks and meetings! Special thanks goes to @KermanToygar, Slava, and Anastas for the smooth organisation

More specifically, with a small budget, access to voter information leads the winning politician to focus on poorer voters, enhancing voter welfare. With a larger budget, informed politicians target a narrow group of swing voters, which harms the voter welfare.

Do voters benefit if competing politicians learn their needs? Me and Arseniy Samsonov show that when politicians have a small budget or the public good has a high value, access to voter information enhances voter welfare (converse holds for large budget) https://t.co/s0DmPbVctv

More specifically, we show that naivety benefits the decision-maker when it leads him to misperceive the alignment of interests as lower than it actually is, making it more challenging for the expert to persuade the decision-maker.

Is naively ignoring the connection between phenomena a good or bad thing for the decision-maker facing an expert? In our paper, @KermanToygar and I show that naivety can benefit the decision-maker

Game theory crowd, please consider submitting your papers to Coalition Theory Network conference in Budapest this summer!

A very nice summer school for anyone interested in games, dynamics, and information:

I spent the last week at @UvA_Amsterdam School of Economics. This was a very exciting and stimulating time, thanks to my amazing coauthor Daniel Barreto and the friendly team of the Microeconomics section of the Department. Looking forward to future visits!

Since September 2023, I have been holding a Researcher position at the European Research University in Ostrava, https://t.co/zwKYttFHnH, where I work on my information economics research agenda. Excited to contribute to academic success in this small, but rapidly growing place!

I'm sharing an update on my job situation. Despite my efforts over 6 months, I was unable to obtain an Irish visa (I'm Russian national) and join ESRI Dublin for a postdoc position. Therefore, I've made the decision to remain in the Czech Republic, where I have part of my family.

Last week, I successfully defended my PhD thesis at @CERGE_EI and became a Doctor. Such a pleasure to have this long and important chapter completed! Thanks to all who supported me on this way!

I highly recommend this position! Their team of researchers is strong and friendly

The paper is here

They show that the electoral district borders are especially important for the mobilization of voters through networks. Further, surprisingly, they find that the mobilization effect is especially prominent for the immigrant population / networks!