Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv · 2609.25071

Who Enters the Record? Paywalls, Contributor Selection, and Social Learning

Abstract

This paper studies social learning when buying access to previous decisions also determines whose decision enters the record. Individuals first receive private information and then decide whether to pay for access. A positive price selects relatively weak private beliefs. With one founding observation, every buyer copies it, and the record acquires no further information. With a richer initial history, buyers can disagree and the record can improve; nevertheless, a price bounded away from zero prevents complete learning, even with unbounded private beliefs. We then consider a rule under which a buyer makes a preliminary choice before access and a revised choice afterward. A positive probability of implementing the preliminary choice makes it follow the private signal. Retaining both choices restores complete learning under a fixed effective fee or pooled myopic pricing, including with bounded beliefs. The rule reduces willingness to pay and sacrifices some current decision accuracy. A worked example shows how the subsequent improvement in information can outweigh both initial losses. The results show why preserving a judgment made before exposure can change what later users learn from the same selected population.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Maria Kovalenko, Georgy Lukyanov. 2026-09-18. Who Enters the Record? Paywalls, Contributor Selection, and Social Learning. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.25071

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Anonymized risk sharing

Anonymized risk sharing requires no information about agents' preferences, identities, private operations, or realized losses. It is especially relevant in the digital economy, with applications such as P2P health-care insurance, revenue sharing for digital music and videos, and blockchain mining pools. Although there is an extensive literature on axiomatic approaches in decision theory, there is, so far, no axiomatic theory of risk sharing. We develop such a theory in the context of anonymized risk sharing. Equilibrium and various notions of optimality are discussed. Applications to the digital economy are presented.

econ.TH↗

Implementation with Uncertain Evidence

We study a full implementation problem with a state unknown to the designer but known to agents, where agents have uncertain evidence privately drawn from state-dependent distributions. This setting allows ``perfect deceptions,'' where agents' reports can mimic the evidence distribution of a false state which cannot also be directly refuted by evidence, making differentiation impossible for any mechanism. This yields our main result: a necessary and sufficient condition, No Perfect Deceptions (NPD), for implementation in (mixed-strategy) Bayesian Nash equilibria. The solution uses ``competing'' scoring rules to elicit ex ante evidence distributions while canceling out in equilibrium, a reflection device that converts low-probability refutations into direct incentives for full evidence submission without penalties that scale with inverse refutation probabilities, and an endogenous ``test allocation'' using bets which separate states based on the evidence probabilities. The constructed mechanism is finite and uses off-equilibrium transfers with maximum magnitude of the order of the outcome. We also allow limited but nontrivial uncertainty in the state dimension. A generalized NPD condition characterizes exact implementation under nonexclusive information and yields exact outcomes with vanishing expected transfers under information smallness.

econ.TH↗

Revisiting Strategic Protectionism in Network Markets

This paper studies the welfare effects of an industrial policy targeting a sector with network externalities in a two-country model with strategic trade and R&D investment. When externalities are weak or the goods are close substitutes, the business-stealing effect dissipates more surplus than the externality creates. Under sufficiently strong externalities and weak substitutability or complementarity of the goods, industrial policy competition can make both countries simultaneously better off compared to the laissez-faire outcome because of the mutual business-enhancement effect. The case is stronger for product innovation than for process innovation, as the former directly affects the demand and triggers a stronger network effect than the latter which operates indirectly through the industry supply. Thus, the network externalities create an opportunity for win-win industrial policies, but its realisation depends on the market structure and the nature of innovation.

econ.TH↗