Satisficing in sales competition: experimental evidence
AbstractIn a duopoly market, aspiration levels express how much sellers want to earn given their expectations about the other?s behavior. We augment the sellers? decision task by eliciting their profit aspiration. In a first experimental phase, whenever satisficing is not possible, sales choices, point beliefs, or aspiration levels have to be adapted. This allows us to investigate which of these three aspects individuals revise more often. In a second phase, testing the absorption of satisficing, participants are free to select non-satisficing sales profiles. The results reveal that most participants are satisficers who tend to adjust aspiration levels if they cannot be satisfied.
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 InfoPaper provided by Faculty of Economics and Statistics, University of Innsbruck in its series Working Papers with number 2009-14.
Date of creation: May 2009
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Universitätsstraße 15, A - 6020 Innsbruck
Web page: http://www.uibk.ac.at/fakultaeten/volkswirtschaft_und_statistik/index.html.en
More information through EDIRC
Satisficing behavior; Duopoly; Profit aspiration; Theory absorption;
Other versions of this item:
- Siegfried Berninghaus & Werner Güth & M. Vittoria Levati & Jianying Qiu, 2006. "Satisficing in sales competition: experimental evidence," Papers on Strategic Interaction 2006-32, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group.
- Berninghaus, Siegfried K. & Gueth, Werner & Levati, M. Vittoria & Qiu, Jianying, 2007. "Satisficing in sales competition: experimental evidence," Sonderforschungsbereich 504 Publications 07-03, Sonderforschungsbereich 504, Universität Mannheim & Sonderforschungsbereich 504, University of Mannheim.
- C92 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Group Behavior
- C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
- D43 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure and Pricing - - - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2009-05-09 (All new papers)
- NEP-CBE-2009-05-09 (Cognitive & Behavioural Economics)
- NEP-EXP-2009-05-09 (Experimental Economics)
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.:
- Drew Fudenberg & David K. Levine, 1998.
"Learning in Games,"
Levine's Working Paper Archive
2222, David K. Levine.
- Youngse Kim, 1999. "Satisficing and optimality in 2þ2 common interest games," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 365-375.
- Lilly, Gregory, 1994. "Bounded rationality : A Simon-like explication," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 205-230, January.
- Werner Güth & Gerlinde Fellner & Ev Martin, 2006. "Satisficing or Optimizing? - An Experimental Study," Papers on Strategic Interaction 2006-11, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group.
- Napel, Stefan, 2003. "Aspiration adaptation in the ultimatum minigame," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 86-106, April.
- Werner Güth & M. Vittoria Levati & Matteo Ploner, 2006. "Is Satisficing Absorbable? - An Experimental Study," Papers on Strategic Interaction 2006-10, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group.
- Huck, Steffen & Muller, Wieland & Normann, Hans-Theo, 2001.
"Stackelberg Beats Cournot: On Collusion and Efficiency in Experimental Markets,"
Royal Economic Society, vol. 111(474), pages 749-65, October.
- Huck, Steffen & Müller, Wieland & Normann, Hans-Theo, 1999. "Stackelberg beats Cournot: On collusion and efficiency in experimental markets," SFB 373 Discussion Papers 1999,32, Humboldt University of Berlin, Interdisciplinary Research Project 373: Quantification and Simulation of Economic Processes.
- Simon, Herbert A, 1979.
"Rational Decision Making in Business Organizations,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 69(4), pages 493-513, September.
- Simon, Herbert A., 1978. "Rational Decision-Making in Business Organizations," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 1978-1, Nobel Prize Committee.
- Roy Radner, 1975. "A Behavioral Model of Cost Reduction," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 6(1), pages 196-215, Spring.
- Jonathan Bendor & Dilip Mookherjee & Debraj Ray, 2001. "Reinforcement Learning in Repeated Interaction Games," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 0(1), pages 3.
- Holt, Charles A, 1985. "An Experimental Test of the Consistent-Conjectures Hypothesis," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 314-25, June.
- Aumann, Robert & Brandenburger, Adam, 1995. "Epistemic Conditions for Nash Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(5), pages 1161-80, September.
- Gerlinde Fellner & Werner Güth & Boris Maciejovsky, 2005. "Satisficing in Financial Decision Making A Theoretical and Experimental Attempt to Explore Bounded Rationality," Papers on Strategic Interaction 2005-23, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group.
- Werner Güth, 2009. "Optimal gelaufen, einfach zufrieden oder unüberlegt gehandelt? Zur Theorie (un)eingeschränkt rationalen Entscheidens," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 10(s1), pages 75-100, 05.
- Mariana Blanco & Dirk Engelmann & Alexander Koch & Hans-Theo Normann, 2010.
"Belief elicitation in experiments: is there a hedging problem?,"
Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 412-438, December.
- Blanco, Mariana & Engelmann, Dirk & Koch, Alexander K. & Normann, Hans-Theo, 2008. "Belief Elicitation in Experiments: Is there a Hedging Problem?," IZA Discussion Papers 3517, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- Werner Güth & M. Vittoria Levati & Matteo Ploner, 2008.
"Satisficing in strategic environments: a theoretical approach and experimental evidence,"
Jena Economic Research Papers
2008-078, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena, Max-Planck-Institute of Economics.
- Güth, Werner & Vittoria Levati, M. & Ploner, Matteo, 2010. "Satisficing in strategic environments: A theoretical approach and experimental evidence," The Journal of Socio-Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 554-561, October.
- Werner Güth, 2007. "A Non-Bayesian Approach to (Un)Bounded Rationality," Jena Economic Research Papers 2007-035, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena, Max-Planck-Institute of Economics.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Matthias Sutter).
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.