The role of self-interest in elite bargaining

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America

Volumn 111, Issue 52, 2014, Pages 18536-18541

  LeVeck, Brad L ^a,b   Hughes, D Alex ^a,c   Fowler, James H ^a,c   Hafner Burton, Emilie ^a,c   Victor, David G ^a  

^a Laboratory on International Law and Regulation   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Bargaining; Elites; Game theory; Self interest; Ultimatum game

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BARGAINING; COLLEGE STUDENT; COMMERCIAL PHENOMENA; EXPERIENCE; HUMAN; LEADERSHIP; NORMAL HUMAN; PERSONALITY; POLICY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SELF INTEREST; STANDARD; UNDERGRADUATE STUDENT;

EID: 84924308117     PISSN: 00278424     EISSN: 10916490     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1409885111     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Güth W, Schmittberger R, Schwarze B (1982) An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining. J Econ Beh Orgzn 3(4):367-388.
2. Henrich J (2006) Social science. Cooperation, punishment, and the evolution of human institutions. Science 312(5770):60-61.
3. Henrich J, et al. (2001) In search of homo economicus: Behavioral experiments in 15 small-scale societies. Am Econ Rev 91(2):73-78.
4. Camerer C (2003) Behavioral Game Theory (Princeton Univ Press, Princeton).
5. Powell R (1999) In the Shadow of Power (Princeton Univ Press, Princeton).
6. Wagner RH (2000) Bargaining and war. Am J Pol Sci 44(3):469-484.
7. Fearon JD (1995) Rationalist explanations for war. Int Organ 49(3):379-414.
8. Fehr E, Schmidt KM (1999) A theory of fairness, competition, and cooperation. Q J Econ 114(3):817-868.
9. Bolton GE, Ockenfels A (2000) ERC: A theory of equity, reciprocity, and competition. Am Econ Rev 90(1):166-193.
10. Yamagishi T, et al. (2012) Rejection of unfair offers in the ultimatum game is no evidence of strong reciprocity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109(50):20364-20368.
11. Kirchsteiger G (1994) The role of envy in ultimatum games. J Econ Beh Orgzn 25(3): 373-389.
12. Brañas-Garza P, Espín AM, Exadaktylos F, Herrmann B (2014) Fair and unfair punishers coexist in the ultimatum game. Sci Rep 4:6025.
13. Henrich J, et al. (2010) Markets, religion, community size, and the evolution of fairness and punishment. Science 327(5972):1480-1484.
14. Rand DG, Tarnita CE, Ohtsuki H, Nowak MA (2013) Evolution of fairness in the oneshot anonymous ultimatum game. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 110(7):2581-2586.
15. Gale J, Binmore KG, Samuelson L (1995) Learning to be imperfect: The ultimatum game. Games Econ Behav 8(1):56-90.
16. Hafner-Burton EM, Hughes DA, Victor DG (2013) The cognitive revolution and the political psychology of elite decision making. Perspect Polit 11(2):368-386.
17. Hafner-Burton EM, LeVeck BL, Victor DG, Fowler JH (2014) Decision maker preferences for international legal cooperation. Int Organ 68(4):845-876.
18. Sherman GD, et al. (2012) Leadership is associated with lower levels of stress. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109(44):17903-17907.
19. Van Vugt M, Ronay R (2013) The evolutionary psychology of leadership: Theory, review, and roadmap. Organ Psychol Rev 4(1):74-95.
20. Chiappori PA, Levitt S, Groseclose T (2002) Testing mixed-strategy equilibria when players are heterogeneous: The case of penalty kicks in soccer. Am Econ Rev 92(4):1138-1151.
21. Walker M, Wooders J (2001) Minimax play at Wimbledon. Am Econ Rev 91(5):1521-1538.
22. List JA (2003) Does market experience eliminate market anomalies? Q J Econ 118(1):41-71.
23. Palacios-Huerta I, Volij O (2009) Field centipedes. Am Econ Rev 99(4):1619-1635.
24. Waltz KN (1979) Theory of International Politics (McGraw-Hill Humanities/Social Sciences/Languages, New York).
25. Levitt SD, List JA, Reiley DH (2010) What happens in the field stays in the field: Exploring whether professionals play minimax in laboratory experiments. Econometrica 78(4):1413-1434.
26. Levitt SD, List JA (2007) What do laboratory experiments measuring social preferences reveal about the real world? J Econ Perspect 21(2):153-174.
27. Barrett S, Dannenberg A (2012) Climate negotiations under scientific uncertainty. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109(43):17372-17376.
28. Rosendorff PB, Milner HV (2001) The optimal design of international trade institutions: Uncertainty and escape. Int Organ 55(4):829-857.
29. Andreoni J, Blanchard E (2006) Testing subgame perfection apart from fairness in ultimatum games. Exp Econ 9(4):307-321.
30. Brandts J, Charness G (2011) The strategy versus the direct-response method: A first survey of experimental comparisons. Exp Econ 14(3):375-398.
31. Pinker S, Nowak MA, Lee JJ (2008) The logic of indirect speech. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105(3):833-838.
32. Geanakoplos J (1992) Common knowledge. J Econ Perspect 6(4):53-82.
33. Rubinstein A (1989) The electronic mail game: Strategic behavior under "almost common knowledge." Am Econ Rev 79(3):385-391.
34. Camerer CF, Ho T-H, Chong J-K (2004) A cognitive hierarchy model of games. Q J Econ 119(3):861-898.
35. Crawford VP, Costa-Gomes MA, Iriberri N (2013) Structural models of nonequilibrium strategic thinking: Theory, evidence, and applications. J Econ Lit 51(1):5-62.
36. Harrison GW, Lau MI, Williams MB (2002) Estimating individual discount rates in Denmark: A field experiment. Am Econ Rev 92(5):1606-1617.
37. Coricelli G, Nagel R (2009) Neural correlates of depth of strategic reasoning in medial prefrontal cortex. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106(23):9163-9168.
38. Nagel R (1995) Unraveling in guessing games: An experimental study. Am Econ Rev 85(5):1313-1326.
39. Bosch-Domènech A, Montalvo JG, Nagel R, Satorra A (2002) One, two, (three), infinity, ...: Newspaper and lab beauty-contest experiments. Am Econ Rev 92(5):1687-1701.
40. Agranov M, Potamites E, Schotter A, Tergiman C (2012) Beliefs and endogenous cognitive levels: An experimental study. Games Econ Behav 75(2):449-463.
41. Solnick SJ (2001) Gender differences in the ultimatum game. Econ Inq 39(2):189-200.
42. Exadaktylos F, Espín AM, Brañas-Garza P (2013) Experimental subjects are not different. Sci Rep 3:1213.
43. Sobel J (2009) Generous actors, selfish actions: Markets with other-regarding preferences. Int J Game Theory 56(1):3-16.
44. Tingley D, Walter B (2011) Reputation building in international relations: An experimental approach. Int Organ 65:343-365.
45. Tingley D (2011) The dark side of the future: An experimental test of commitment problems in bargaining. Int Stud Q 55:521-544.
46. McDermott R (2011) New directions for experimental work in international relations. Int Stud Q 55(2):503-520.
47. Schwab SC (2013) After Doha: Why the negotiations are doomed and what we should do about it. Foreign Aff 90(3):104-117.
48. Victor DG (2011) Global Warming Gridlock (Cambridge Univ Press, Cambridge, UK).
49. Nordhaus WD (2013) The Climate Casino (Yale Univ Press, New Haven, CT).
50. Rajamani L (2011) The Cancun Climate Agreements: Reading the text, subtext and tea leaves. Int Comp Law Q 60(2):499-519.
51. Rajamani L (2000) The principle of common but differentiated responsibility and the balance of commitments under the climate regime. Rev Eur Community Int Environ Law 9(2):120-131.
52. Parry ML (2007) Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability: Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Cambridge Univ Press, Cambridge, UK).
53. Field CB (2012) Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation: Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change (Cambridge Univ Press, Cambridge, UK).
54. Gardiner SM (2004) Ethics and global climate change. Ethics 114(3):555-600.