Cooperative games and cooperative organizations
AbstractIt is well known that game theory has two major branches, cooperative and noncooperative game theory. Noncooperative game theory is the better known and more influential of the two. A difference is that cooperative game theory admits of binding agreements to choose a joint strategy in the mutual interest of those who agree. Cooperative organizations, too, are seen as being in the mutual interest of the members, but there has been little contact between the two bodies of thought. This paper surveys cooperative game theory and explores the extent to which cooperative game theory may help us to understand (and perhaps extend) cooperative organizations. In particular, reciprocity motives are introduced into the cooperative game analysis, and this may provide a link between cooperative game theory and cooperative organizations.
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.
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.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Elsevier in its journal The Journal of Socio-Economics.
Volume (Year): 37 (2008)
Issue (Month): 6 (December)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/620175
Game theory Cooperative games Cooperatives;
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.:
- Tibor Scitovsky, 1954. "Two Concepts of External Economies," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 62, pages 143.
- Hessel Oosterbeek & Randolph Sloof & Gijs van de Kuilen, 2004.
"Cultural Differences in Ultimatum Game Experiments: Evidence from a Meta-Analysis,"
Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 171-188, 06.
- Hessel Oosterbeek & Randolph Sloof & Gijs van de Kuilen, 2004. "Cultural differences in ultimatum game experiments: Evidence from a meta-analysis," Experimental 0401003, EconWPA.
- Roth, Alvin E. & Erev, Ido, 1995. "Learning in extensive-form games: Experimental data and simple dynamic models in the intermediate term," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 164-212.
- Andreoni,J. & Blanchard,E., 2002.
"Testing subgame perfection apart from fairness in ultimatum games,"
15, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
- James Andreoni & Emily Blanchard, 2006. "Testing subgame perfection apart from fairness in ultimatum games," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 9(4), pages 307-321, December.
- Nash, John, 1950. "The Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), pages 155-162, April.
- Dan Friedman, 2010. "Equilibrium in Evolutionary Games: Some Experimental Results," Levine's Working Paper Archive 393, David K. Levine.
- Rapoport, Amnon & Boebel, Richard B., 1992. "Mixed strategies in strictly competitive games: A further test of the minimax hypothesis," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 4(2), pages 261-283, April.
- Jingang Zhao, 1990.
"The Hybrid Solutions of an n-Person Game,"
Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers
956, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
- Berg Joyce & Dickhaut John & McCabe Kevin, 1995. "Trust, Reciprocity, and Social History," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 122-142, July.
- Richard McKelvey & Thomas Palfrey, 1999. "An experimental study of the centipede game," Levine's Working Paper Archive 521, David K. Levine.
- Ernst Fehr & Urs Fischbacher, 2004.
"Third-party punishment and social norms,"
- Friedman, Daniel, 1996. "Equilibrium in Evolutionary Games: Some Experimental Results," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(434), pages 1-25, January.
- Hoffman, Elizabeth & McCabe, Kevin A & Smith, Vernon L, 1998. "Behavioral Foundations of Reciprocity: Experimental Economics and Evolutionary Psychology," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 36(3), pages 335-52, July.
- Diekmann, Andreas, 1993. "Cooperation in an Asymmetric Volunteer's Dilemma Game: Theory and Experimental Evidence," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 75-85.
- McKelvey, Richard D & Palfrey, Thomas R, 1992. "An Experimental Study of the Centipede Game," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(4), pages 803-36, July.
- Guth, Werner & Schmittberger, Rolf & Schwarze, Bernd, 1982. "An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 367-388, December.
- Schotter Andrew & Weigelt Keith & Wilson Charles, 1994.
"A Laboratory Investigation of Multiperson Rationality and Presentation Effects,"
Games and Economic Behavior,
Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 445-468, May.
- Schotter, Andrew & Weigelt, Keith & Wilson, Charles, 1990. "A Laboratory Investigation Of Multi-Person Rationality And Presentation Effects," Working Papers 90-24, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
- Cho, In-Koo & Kreps, David M, 1987.
"Signaling Games and Stable Equilibria,"
The Quarterly Journal of Economics,
MIT Press, vol. 102(2), pages 179-221, May.
- Shapley, Lloyd S. & Shubik, Martin, 1969. "On market games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 9-25, June.
- Stanley, T. D. & Tran, Ume, 1998. "Economics students need not be greedy: Fairness and the ultimatum game," The Journal of Socio-Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 657-663.
- Nash, John, 1953. "Two-Person Cooperative Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 21(1), pages 128-140, April.
- W. Guth & R. Schmittberger & B. Schwartz, 2010. "An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining," Levine's Working Paper Archive 291, David K. Levine.
- Aumann, Robert J., 2003. "Presidential address," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 2-14, October.
- Dur, Robert & Roelfsema, Hein, 2010.
"Social exchange and common agency in organizations,"
The Journal of Socio-Economics,
Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 55-63, January.
- Robert Dur & Hein Roelfsema, 2006. "Social Exchange and Common Agency in Organizations," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 06-111/1, Tinbergen Institute, revised 15 Oct 2008.
- Robert Dur & Hein Roelfsema, 2006. "Social Exchange and Common Agency in Organizations," Working Papers 06-11, Utrecht School of Economics.
- Robert Dur & Hein Roelfsema, 2007. "Social Exchange and Common Agency in Organizations," CESifo Working Paper Series 2030, CESifo Group Munich.
- Carmen Marcuello & Pablo Nachar-Calderón, 2012. "Sociedad cooperativa y socio cooperativo: propuesta de sus funciones objetivo," Documentos de Trabajo dt2012-02, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Universidad de Zaragoza.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wendy Shamier).
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.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.