Two Person Bargaining Mechanisms: A Laboratory Experiment

被引:1
作者
Bol, Damien [1 ]
Laslier, Jean-Francois [2 ]
Nunez, Matias [3 ]
机构
[1] Kings Coll London, Dept Polit Econ, London, England
[2] Paris Sch Econ, CNRS, Paris, France
[3] Inst Polytech Paris, ENSAE Paris, GENES, Ecole Polytech,CREST,CNRS, F-91120 Palaiseau, France
关键词
Experiments; Consensus; Inequality; Bargaining; NASH IMPLEMENTATION; SELECTION; EQUILIBRIUM; PREFERENCES; CHOICE;
D O I
10.1007/s10726-022-09793-y
中图分类号
C93 [管理学];
学科分类号
12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;
摘要
We conduct a series of experiments in which two subjects bargain over five options. Following an experimental design closely related to De Clippel et al. (Am Econ Rev 104:3434-3458, 2014), we evaluate the performance of three bargaining mechanisms: (alpha) one subject shortlists a block of three options before the other chooses one among them, (ss) both subjects veto options simultaneously and in a block, and (gamma) both subjects veto options simultaneously and gradually one after the other. We document that the non-symmetric shortlisting mechanism (alpha) is highly efficient, but our data also suggest the existence of a first-mover advantage as subjects become more experienced. The simultaneous mechanism (ss) is less efficient than (alpha) and generates a high level of ex-post inequality. The gradual veto mechanism (gamma) is no less efficient than (alpha), but has the important advantage of shutting down the possibility of any first-mover advantage.
引用
收藏
页码:1145 / 1177
页数:33
相关论文
共 36 条
[1]   Finite alternating-move arbitration schemes and the equal area solution [J].
Anbarci, N .
THEORY AND DECISION, 2006, 61 (01) :21-50
[2]   Compromising on compromise rules [J].
Barbera, Salvador ;
Coelho, Danilo .
RAND JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, 2022, 53 (01) :95-112
[3]   A comprehensive comparison of students and non-students in classic experimental games [J].
Belot, Michele ;
Duch, Raymond ;
Miller, Luis .
JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC BEHAVIOR & ORGANIZATION, 2015, 113 :26-33
[4]  
Bermant Gordon, 1981, The Trial Process, P69, DOI DOI 10.1007/978-1-4684-3767-6_2
[5]  
BLOOM DE, 1986, AM ECON REV, V76, P408
[6]  
Bol D., 2016, VOTING EXPT, P271, DOI [10.1007/978-3-319-40573-5_14, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-40573-5_14]
[7]   Fallback bargaining [J].
Brams, SJ ;
Kilgour, DM .
GROUP DECISION AND NEGOTIATION, 2001, 10 (04) :287-316
[8]   Dynamic Unstructured Bargaining with Private Information: Theory, Experiment, and Outcome Prediction via Machine Learning [J].
Camerer, Colin F. ;
Nave, Gideon ;
Smith, Alec .
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 2019, 65 (04) :1867-1890
[9]   Evaluating replicability of laboratory experiments in economics [J].
Camerer, Colin F. ;
Dreber, Anna ;
Forsell, Eskil ;
Ho, Teck-Hua ;
Huber, Juergen ;
Johannesson, Magnus ;
Kirchler, Michael ;
Almenberg, Johan ;
Altmejd, Adam ;
Chan, Taizan ;
Heikensten, Emma ;
Holzmeister, Felix ;
Imai, Taisuke ;
Isaksson, Siri ;
Nave, Gideon ;
Pfeiffer, Thomas ;
Razen, Michael ;
Wu, Hang .
SCIENCE, 2016, 351 (6280) :1433-1436
[10]   Altruistic behavior in a representative dictator experiment [J].
Carpenter, Jeffrey ;
Connolly, Cristina ;
Myers, Caitlin Knowles .
EXPERIMENTAL ECONOMICS, 2008, 11 (03) :282-298