On competing rewards standards - An experimental study of ultimatum bargaining

Journal of Socio-Economics

Volumn 31, Issue 6, 2003, Pages 599-607

  Gneezy, Uri ^a   Guth, Werner ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

^b HUMBOLDT UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

Asymmetric procedure; Reward standards; Ultimatum bargaining

Indexed keywords

EID: 0037222198     PISSN: 10535357     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1053-5357(02)00142-7     Document Type: Article

References (10)

1. Guth, W., 1988. On the behavioral approach to distributive justice - a theoretical and experimental investigation. In: Maital S. (Ed.), Applied Behavioral Economics, Vol. II. Brighton, pp. 703-717.
2. Guth, W., 1994. Distributive justice - a behavioral theory and empirical evidence, In: Brandstatter, H., Guth, W. (Eds.), Essays on Economic Psychology. Springer, Verlag, pp. 153-176.
3. Homans, G.C., 1961. Social Behavior:Its Elementary Forms, London.
4. Kagel, J.H., Kim, C., Moser, D., 1966. Fairness in ultimatum games with asymmetric information and asymmetric payoffs. Games and Economic Behavior 13, 100-110.
5. Nash, J.F., 1953. Two-person cooperative games. Econometrica 21, 128-140.
6. Nydegger, R.V., Own, G., 1974. Two-person bargaining: an experimental test of the nash axioms. International Journal of Game Theory 3, 239-249.
7. Roth, A.E., Malouf, M.W.K., 1979. Game - theoretic models and the role of information in bargaining. Psychological Review 86, 574-594.
8. Roth, A.E., Murnighan, J.K., 1982. The role of information in bargaining: an experimental study. Econometrica 50, 1123-1142.
9. Roth A.E., 1995. Bargaining experiments. In: Kagel, J., Roth, A.E. (Eds.), The Handbook of Experimental Economics. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, pp. 253-348.
10. Shapiro, E.G., 1975. Effects of future interaction on reward allocation in dyads: equity or equality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 31, 873-880.