Choice of routes in congested traffic networks: Experimental tests of the Braess Paradox
AbstractThe Braess Paradox consists of showing that, in equilibrium, adding a new link that connects two routes running between a common origin and common destination may raise the travel cost for each network user. We report the results of two experiments designed to study whether the paradox is behaviorally realized in two simulated traffic networks that differ from each other in their topology. Both experiments include relatively large groups of participants who independently and repeatedly choose travel routes in one of two types of traffic networks, one with the added links and the other without them. Our results reject the hypothesis that the paradox is of marginal value and its force diminishes with experience. Rather, they strongly support the alternative hypothesis that with experience in traversing the networks financially motivated players converge to choosing the equilibrium routes in the network with added capacity despite sustaining a sharp decline in earnings.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Elsevier in its journal Games and Economic Behavior.
Volume (Year): 65 (2009)
Issue (Month): 2 (March)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/622836
Braess Paradox Congested traffic networks Route choice Experiments;
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.:
- Penchina, Claude M., 1997. "Braess paradox: Maximum penalty in a minimal critical network," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 379-388, September.
- Dafermos, Stella & Nagurney, Anna, 1984. "On some traffic equilibrium theory paradoxes," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 101-110, April.
- Richard Arnott & Andre de Palma & Robin Lindsey, 1985.
"Economics of a Bottleneck,"
636, Queen's University, Department of Economics.
- Pas, Eric I. & Principio, Shari L., 1997. "Braess' paradox: Some new insights," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 265-276, June.
- Fisk, Caroline, 1979. "More paradoxes in the equilibrium assignment problem," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 305-309, December.
- Eyran Gisches & Amnon Rapoport, 2012. "Degrading network capacity may improve performance: private versus public monitoring in the Braess Paradox," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 73(2), pages 267-293, August.
- Shanjiang Zhu & David Levinson & Henry Liu, 2009. "Measuring Winners and Losers from the new I-35W Mississippi River Bridge," Working Papers 000066, University of Minnesota: Nexus Research Group.
- Terry E. Daniel & Eyran J. Gisches & Amnon Rapoport, 2009. "Departure Times in Y-Shaped Traffic Networks with Multiple Bottlenecks," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(5), pages 2149-76, December.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.