Author(s): Pierpaolo Battigalli, Emiliano Catonini
We study strategic reasoning in a signaling game where players have common belief in an outcome distribution and in the event that the receiver believes that the sender's first-order beliefs are independent of her payoff-type. We characterize the behavioral implications of these epistemic hypotheses through a rationalizability procedure with second-order belief restrictions. Our solution concept is related to, but weaker than Divine Equilibrium (Banks and Sobel, 1987). First, we do not obtain sequential equilibrium, but just Perfect Bayesian Equilibrium with heterogeneous off-path beliefs (Fudenberg and He, 2018). Second, when we model how the receiver may rationalize a particular deviation, we take into account that some types could have preferred a different deviation, and we show this is natural and relevant via an economic example.