Information acquisition in the ultimatum game: An experimental study

Experimental Economics

Volumn 10, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 391-409

  Poulsen, Anders U ^a   Tan, Jonathan H W ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EAST ANGLIA   (United Kingdom)

^b EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY VIADRINA   (Germany)

Author keywords

Fairness; Inequity aversion; Information acquisition; Ultimatum game

Indexed keywords

EID: 36049009752     PISSN: 13864157     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10683-006-9143-z     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Babcock, L., & Loewenstein, G. (1997). Explaining bargaining impasse: The role of self-serving biases. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 11(1), 109-126.
2. Brandts, J., & Charness, G. (2000). Hot and cold decisions and reciprocity in experiments with sequential games. Experimental Economics, 2(3), 227-238.
3. Brosig, J., Weimann, J., & Yang, C. (2003). The Hot versus cold effect in a simple bargaining experiment. Experimental Economics, 6(1), 75-91.
4. Camerer, C. (2003). Behavioral game theory: Experiments in strategic interaction. Princeton University Press.
5. Camerer, C., & Loewenstein, G. (1993). Information, fairness, and efficiency in bargaining. In B. Mellers, & J. Baron (Eds.), Psychological perspectives on justice: Theory and applications (pp. 155-179). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
6. Camerer, C., Loewenstein, G., & Weber, M. (1989). The curse of knowledge in economic settings: An experimental analysis. Journal of Political Economy, 97(5), 1232-1254.
7. Costa-Gomes, M., & Zauner, K. (2001). Ultimatum bargaining in Israel, Japan, Slovenia, and the United States: A social utility analysis. Games and Economic Behavior, 34(2), 238-269.
8. Fehr, E., & Schmidt, K. (1999). A theory of fairness, competition and cooperation. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114, 817-868.
9. Fischer, S., Gúth, W., Múller, W., & Stiehler, A. (2006). From ultimatum to nash bargaining: Theory and experimental evidence. Experimental Economics, 9(1), 17-33.
10. Fonseca, M., Huck, S., & Normann, H. (2004). Playing cournot although they shouldn't. Economic Theory, 25, 669-677.
11. Gehrig, T., Gúth, W., & Levinský, R. (2003). Ultimatum offers and the role of transparency: An experimental study of information acquisition, working paper no. 16-2003, Max-Planck Institute for Research into Economic Systems, Jena, Germany.
12. Gúth, W., Huck, S., & Rapoport, A. (1998). The limitations of the positional order effect: Can it support silent threats and non-equilibrium behavior? Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 34, 313-325.
13. Gúth, W., Múller, W., & Spiegel, Y. (2006). Noisy leadership: An experimental approach. Games and Economic Behavior, 57(1), 37-62.
14. Fonseca, M., Huck, S., & Normann, H. (2004). Playing Cournot although they shouldn't-endogenous timing in experimental duopolies with asymmetric cost. Economic Theory, 25(3), 669-677.
15. Hamilton, J., & Slutsky, S. (1990). Endogenous timing in duopoly games: Stackelberg or Cournot equilibria. Games and Economic Behavior, 2(1), 29-46.
16. Harrison, G., & McCabe, K. (1996). Expectations and fairness in a simple bargaining experiment. International Journal of Game Theory, 25, 303-327.
17. Huck, S., Múller, W., & Normann, H. (2001). Stackelberg beats cournot-on collusion and efficiency in experimental duopoly. Economic Journal, 111, 749-766.
18. Kagel, J., Kim, C., & Moser, D. (1992). Fairness in ultimatum games with asymmetric information and asymmetric payoffs. Games and Economic Behavior, 13, 100-110.
19. Knez, M., & Camerer, C. (1995). Outside options and social comparison in three-player ultimatum game experiments. Games and Economic Behavior, 10(1), 65-94.
20. Loewenstein, G., Moore, D., & Weber, R. (2006). Misperceiving the value of information in predicting the performance of others. Experimental Economics, 9(3), 281-295.
21. Oxoby, R., & McLeish, K. (2004). Sequential decision and strategy vector methods in ultimatum bargaining: Evidence on the strength of other-regarding behavior. Economics Letters, 84, 399-405.
22. Rankin, F., Van Huyck, J., & Battalio R. (2000). Strategic similarity and emergent conventions: Evidence from payoff perturbed stag hunt games. Games and Economic Behavior, 32(2), 315-337.
23. Roth, A., & Murnighan, K. (1982). The role of information in bargaining: An experimental study. Econometrica, 50, 1123-1142.
24. Schelling, T. (1960). The strategy of conflict. Harvard University Press.
25. Selten, R. (1967). Die Strategiemethode zur Erforschung des eingeschránkt rationalen Verhaltens im Rahmen eines Oligopolexperiments. In H. Sauermann (Ed.), Beitráge zur experimentellen Wirtschafts- forschung. Mohr-Verlag.
26. Weber, R., Camerer, C., & Knez, M. (2004). Timing and virtual observability in ultimatum bargaining and " weak link" coordination games. Experimental Economics, 7(1), 25-49.