IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolet/v143y2016icp114-117.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does regret matter in first-price auctions?

Author

Listed:
  • Ratan, Anmol
  • Wen, Yuanji

Abstract

“Overbidding” with respect to risk-neutral Nash predictions in first-price auction experiments has been consistently reported in the literature. One possible explanation for overbidding is that participants in these experiments may try to avoid regret induced by the knowledge of winning bids in case they do not win these auctions. Such considerations may drive bidders to bid aggressively in first-price auctions. We test whether differences in how auction outcomes are revealed produces systematic differences in bidding. In our design, where individuals bid against pre-programmed computers, differences in revelation of winning bids, does not produce significant treatment differences. Our results are in contrast to previous experiments, which report systematic treatment differences based on whether winning bids are revealed or not.

Suggested Citation

  • Ratan, Anmol & Wen, Yuanji, 2016. "Does regret matter in first-price auctions?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 114-117.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:143:y:2016:i:c:p:114-117
    DOI: 10.1016/j.econlet.2016.03.021
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016517651630091X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.econlet.2016.03.021?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Paul Pezanis-Christou & Hang Wu, 2017. "A Naïve Approach to Bidding," School of Economics and Public Policy Working Papers 2017-03, University of Adelaide, School of Economics and Public Policy.
    2. Sascha Füllbrunn & Dirk‐Jan Janssen & Utz Weitzel, 2019. "Risk Aversion And Overbidding In First Price Sealed Bid Auctions: New Experimental Evidence," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 57(1), pages 631-647, January.
    3. García-Pola, Bernardo, 2020. "Do people minimize regret in strategic situations? A level-k comparison," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 82-104.
    4. Xiao, Haohan & Xu, Meng, 2022. "Modelling bidding behaviors in shared parking auctions considering anticipated regrets," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 88-106.
    5. Paul Pezanis-Christou & Hang Wu, 2018. "A non-game-theoretic approach to bidding in first-price and all-pay auctions," School of Economics and Public Policy Working Papers 2018-12, University of Adelaide, School of Economics and Public Policy.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Overbidding; Auction; Anticipated regret; Ambiguity; Laboratory experiments;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C7 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory
    • C9 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments
    • D4 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design
    • D8 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:143:y:2016:i:c:p:114-117. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolet .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.