We explore the effects on strategic behavior of alternative representations of a centipede
game that differ in terms of complexity. In a laboratory experiment, we manipulate the
way in which payoffs are presented to subjects in two different ways. In both cases,
information is made less accessible relative to the standard representation of the game.
Results show that these manipulations shift the distribution of take nodes further away
from the equilibrium prediction. The evidence is consistent with the view that failures
of game-form recognition and the resulting limits to strategic reasoning are crucial for
explaining non-equilibrium behavior in the centipede game.