IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jogath/v30y2002i3p321-350.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Entry coordination in auctions and social welfare: An experimental investigation

Author

Listed:
  • Dan Levin

    (Department of Economics, Ohio State University, 410 Arps Hall, 1945 North High Street, Columbus, OH 43210-1172 Revised February 2000)

  • James L. Smith

    (Department of Finance, 440 Fincher Building, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX 75275-0333)

Abstract

Most of the literature on auctions with endogenous entry assumes that, in equilibrium, the number of entrants is deterministic. We discuss a series of experiments designed to test the alternative hypothesis that, even in equilibrium, the number of entrants is stochastic. This distinction has strong implications for auction performance, the design of optimal mechanisms, and social welfare. Our results strongly reject the hypothesis of deterministic entry and tend to confirm the alternative hypothesis that entry is stochastic.

Suggested Citation

  • Dan Levin & James L. Smith, 2002. "Entry coordination in auctions and social welfare: An experimental investigation," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 30(3), pages 321-350.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:jogath:v:30:y:2002:i:3:p:321-350
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.de/link/service/journals/00182/papers/2030003/20300321.pdf
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted
    ---><---

    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. Chakravarty, Surajeet & Ghosh, Sudeep, 2011. "An experimental investigation of entry cost effects in sealed-bid dollar auctions," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 111(2), pages 122-124, May.
    2. Joyce Delnoij & Kris Jaegher, 2020. "Competing first-price and second-price auctions," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 69(1), pages 183-216, February.
    3. Ivanova-Stenzel, Radosveta & Salmon, Timothy C., 2011. "The high/low divide: Self-selection by values in auction choice," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 200-214, September.
    4. Ehud Guttel & Barak Medina, 2007. "Less Crime, More (Vulnerable) Victims: Game Theory and the Distributional Effects of Criminal Sanctions," Discussion Paper Series dp472, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
    5. Ronald M Harstad, 2011. "Endogenous Competition Alters the Structure of Optimal Auctions," ISER Discussion Paper 0816, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    6. Ivanova-Stenzel, Radosveta & Salmon, Timothy C., 2008. "Revenue equivalence revisited," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 171-192, September.
    7. J.M.J. Delnoij & K.J.M. De Jaegher, 2016. "Competing first-price and second-price auctions," Working Papers 16-07, Utrecht School of Economics.
    8. Ehud Guttel & Barak Medina, 2007. "Less Crime, More (Vulnerable) Victims: Game Theory and the Distributional Effects of Criminal Sanctions," Levine's Bibliography 122247000000001799, UCLA Department of Economics.
    9. Tong Li, 2005. "Econometrics of first-price auctions with entry and binding reservation prices," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 126(1), pages 173-200, May.
    10. Diego Aycinena & Hernán Bejarano & Lucas Rentschler, 2018. "Informed entry in auctions," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 47(1), pages 175-205, March.
    11. Diego Aycinena & Lucas Rentschler, 2018. "Auctions with endogenous participation and an uncertain number of bidders: experimental evidence," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 21(4), pages 924-949, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Auctions · Entry · Experiments · Coordination;

    JEL classification:

    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior

    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:spr:jogath:v:30:y:2002:i:3:p:321-350. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.