Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Tournaments, Risk Perceptions, And Fairness

Contents:

Author Info

  • Wu, Steven Y.
  • Roe, Brian E.
Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    This paper reports the results of an economic experiment investigating human subjects’' preferences for two types of contracts – tournaments and fixed performance standard contracts. Willingness to pay data was elicited through an auction and results suggest that subjects prefer fixed performance standard contracts to tournaments. Primary drivers of this result appear to be subjects’' perceptions that tournaments are more risky and less fair than fixed performance standard contracts. Surprisingly, measures of the relative profitability of the contracts did not correlate with willingness to pay. Our results can shed light on why agricultural producers express frustration over tournaments and can provide insights on contract and policy design.

    Download Info

    If 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.
    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/20154
    Download Restriction: no

    Bibliographic Info

    Paper provided by American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association) in its series 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO with number 20154.

    as in new window
    Length:
    Date of creation: 2004
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea04:20154

    Contact details of provider:
    Postal: 555 East Wells Street, Suite 1100, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202
    Phone: (414) 918-3190
    Fax: (414) 276-3349
    Email:
    Web page: http://www.aaea.org
    More information through EDIRC

    Related research

    Keywords: Research Methods/ Statistical Methods;

    References

    References listed on IDEAS
    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.:
    as in new window
    1. Noussair, C.N. & Plott, C. & Riezman, R., 1995. "An experimental investigation of the patterns of international trade," Open Access publications from Tilburg University urn:nbn:nl:ui:12-387775, Tilburg University.
    2. Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, . "A Theory of Fairness, Competition and Cooperation," IEW - Working Papers 004, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    3. Schotter, Andrew & Weigelt, Keith, 1992. "Asymmetric Tournaments, Equal Opportunity Laws, and Affirmative Action: Some Experimental Results," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 107(2), pages 511-39, May.
    4. Ernst Fehr & Simon Gaechter, 2000. "Fairness and Retaliation: The Economics of Reciprocity," CESifo Working Paper Series 336, CESifo Group Munich.
    5. Bull, Clive & Schotter, Andrew & Weigelt, Keith, 1987. "Tournaments and Piece Rates: An Experimental Study," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 95(1), pages 1-33, February.
    6. Reinhard Selten & Abdolkarim Sadrieh & Klaus Abbink, 1999. "Money Does Not Induce Risk Neutral Behavior, but Binary Lotteries Do even Worse," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 46(3), pages 213-252, June.
    7. Armando Levy & Tomislav Vukina, 2004. "The League Composition Effect in Tournaments with Heterogeneous Players: An Empirical Analysis of Broiler Contracts," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 22(2), pages 353-378, April.
    8. Brent Hueth & Ethan Ligon, 2001. "Agricultural Markets as Relative Performance Evaluation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(2), pages 318-328.
    9. Berg, Joyce E, et al, 1986. "Controlling Preferences for Lotteries on Units of Experimental Exchange," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 101(2), pages 281-306, May.
    10. Güth, Werner & Kliemt, Hartmut & Ockenfels, Axel, 2000. "Fairness versus efficiency: An experimental study of (mutual) gift giving," SFB 373 Discussion Papers 2001,6, Humboldt University of Berlin, Interdisciplinary Research Project 373: Quantification and Simulation of Economic Processes.
    11. Theofanis Tsoulouhas & Tomislav Vukina, 2001. "Regulating Broiler Contracts: Tournaments Versus Fixed Performance Standards," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(4), pages 1062-1073.
    12. Vital Anderhub & Simon Gaechter & Manfred Koenigstein, . "Efficient Contracting and Fair Play in a Simple Principal-Agent Experiment," IEW - Working Papers 018, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    13. James Andreoni & Marco Castillo & Ragan Petrie, 2003. "What Do Bargainers' Preferences Look Like? Experiments with a Convex Ultimatum Game," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(3), pages 672-685, June.
    14. Ernst Fehr & Simon Gachter & Georg Kirchsteiger, 2001. "Reciprocity as a Contract Enforcement Device," Levine's Working Paper Archive 563824000000000143, David K. Levine.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:aaea04:20154. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search).

    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.