Download Info

To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Publisher Info

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Games and Economic Behavior.

Volume (Year): 10 (1995)
Issue (Month): 1 (July)
Pages: 65-94
Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Handle: RePEc:eee:gamebe:v:10:y:1995:i:1:p:65-94

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/622836

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Heidi Boesdal).

Related research

Keywords:

Cited by:
(explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)

1. Ernesto Reuben & Frans van Winden, 2006. "Reciprocity and Emotions when Reciprocators Know each other," CESifo Working Paper Series CESifo Working Paper No. , CESifo Group Munich. [Downloadable!]
   Other versions:
   • Ernesto Reuben & Frans van Winden, 2004. "Reciprocity and Emotions when Reciprocators know each other," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 04-098/1, Tinbergen Institute. [Downloadable!]
2. Susanne Lechner & Renate Ohr, 2008. "The Right of Withdrawal in the Treaty of Lisbon: A game theoretic reflection on different decision processes in the EU," cege – Center for European, Governance and Economic Development Research Discussion Papers 77, cege – Center for European, Governance and Economic Development Research, University of Goettingen (Germany)., revised 20 Oct 2008. [Downloadable!]
3. Randolph Sloof, 2003. "Price-setting Power versus Private Information," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 03-099/1, Tinbergen Institute. [Downloadable!]
4. Ernesto Reuben & Frans van Winden, 2005. "Negative Reciprocity and the Interaction of Emotions and Fairness Norms," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 05-014/1, Tinbergen Institute. [Downloadable!]
   Other versions:
   • Ernesto Reuben & Frans van Winden, 2006. "Negative Reciprocity and the Interaction of Emotions and Fairness Norms," CESifo Working Paper Series CESifo Working Paper No. , CESifo Group Munich. [Downloadable!]
5. Hå Holm & Peter Engseld, 2005. "Choosing Bargaining Partners—An Experimental Study on the Impact of Information About Income, Status and Gender," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 183-216, September. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
6. Ernesto Reuben & Frans van Winden, . "Social Ties and Coordination on Negative Reciprocity: The Role of Affect," Discussion Papers 06-08, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. [Downloadable!]
   Other versions:
   • Reuben, Ernesto & van Winden, Frans, 2008. "Social ties and coordination on negative reciprocity: The role of affect," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(1-2), pages 34-53, February. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
7. Pamela Schmitt, 2004. "On Perceptions of Fairness: The Role of Valuations, Outside Options, and Information in Ultimatum Bargaining Games," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 49-73, February. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
8. Alan Sanfey, 2009. "Expectations and social decision-making: biasing effects of prior knowledge on Ultimatum responses," Mind and Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 8(1), pages 93-107, June. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
9. Poulsen, Anders U. & Tan, Jonathan H.W., 2004. "Can Information Backfire? - Experimental Evidence from the Ultimatum Game," Working Papers 04-16, University of Aarhus, Aarhus School of Business, Department of Economics. [Downloadable!]
10. Bohnet, Iris & Zeckhauser, Richard, 2003. "Social Comparisons in Ultimatum Bargaining," Working Paper Series rwp03-028, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
    • Iris Bohnet & Richard Zeckhauser, 2004. "Social comparisons in ultimatum bargaining," CREMA Working Paper Series 2004-08, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA). [Downloadable!]
    • Iris Bohnet & Richard Zeckhauser, 2004. "Social Comparisons in Ultimatum Bargaining," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 106(3), pages 495-510, October. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
11. Gary Charness & Margarida Corominas, 2000. "Bargaining on Networks: An Experiment," Economics Working Papers 492, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra. [Downloadable!]
12. Riedl, A. & Vyrastekova, J., 2002. "Social preference in three-player ultimatum game experiments," Discussion Paper 5, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research. [Downloadable!]
13. Anders Poulsen & Jonathan Tan, 2007. "Information acquisition in the ultimatum game: An experimental study," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 10(4), pages 391-409, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
14. Babcock, Linda & Loewenstein, George, 1997. "Explaining Bargaining Impasse: The Role of Self-Serving Biases," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 11(1), pages 109-26, Winter. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
15. Kohnz, Simone, 2006. "Self-Serving Biases in Bargaining," Discussion Papers in Economics 899, University of Munich, Department of Economics. [Downloadable!]
16. Gächter, Simon & Nosenzo, Daniele & Sefton, Martin, 2008. "The Impact of Social Comparisons on Reciprocity," IZA Discussion Papers 3639, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA). [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
    • Simon Gaechter & Daniele Nosenzo & Martin Sefton, 2008. "The Impact of Social Comparisons on Reciprocity," Discussion Papers 2008-09, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham. [Downloadable!]
17. Erin Krupka & Roberto A. Weber, 2007. "The Focusing and Informational Effects of Norms on Pro-Social Behavior," IZA Discussion Papers 3169, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA). [Downloadable!]
18. Hessel Oosterbeek & Randolph Sloof & Joep Sonnemans, 2007. "Who should invest in specific training?," Journal of Population Economics, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 329-357, April. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
19. Heike Hennig-Schmidt & Zhu-Yu Li & Chaoliang Yang, 2004. "Why People Reject Advantageous Offers – Non-monotone Strategies in Ultimatum Bargaining," Bonn Econ Discussion Papers bgse22_2004, University of Bonn, Germany. [Downloadable!]
20. Sven Fischer, 2005. "Inequality Aversion in Ultimatum Games with Asymmetric Conflict Payoffs - A Theoretical and Experimental Analysis -," Papers on Strategic Interaction 2005-36, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group. [Downloadable!]

Did you know? To receive notification of recent additions to the database, subscribe to the free NEP reports.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-7.