Reputations and Fairness in Bargaining - Experimental Evidence from a Repeated Ultimatum Game With Fixed Opponents
AbstractThe results of Ultimatum Game experiments are often quoted as evidence for the role of fairness in bargaining or in economic behaviour more generally. This paper argues that the observed fairness levels are contingent on the traditional experimental design where players are newly matched each round, and reputations are therefore excluded. Evidence from a new experiment shows that average behaviour is more competitive and conflict rates are higher when subjects play against the same opponent repeatedly. This finding is not expected by the traditional fairness hypothesis. A detailed analysis of the dynamics of pairs of players shows that different types of players coexist in the subject pool. Whereas previous experiments found evidence for the existence of "fair" players, the present study reports also a significant number of "tough" players. Hence, there is evidence that allowing for reputations in repeated ultimatum bargaining induces different patterns of behaviour that have not been observed before in this game.
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 EconWPA in its series Experimental with number 9905002.
Length: 22 pages
Date of creation: 04 May 1999
Date of revision:
Note: Type of Document - PDF-File; prepared on IBM PC; to print on HP/PostScript/; pages: 22 ; figures: included. Discussion Paper No. 9904, Department of Economics, University of St.Gallen, March 1999, downloads http://www.fgn.unisg.ch/public/public.htm
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://18.104.22.168
game theory; experiments; learning; fairness; reputations; ultimatum game;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
- C78 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Bargaining Theory; Matching Theory
- C92 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Group Behavior
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.:
- Russell Cooper & Douglas V. DeJong & Thomas W. Ross, 1992.
"Cooperation without Reputation: Experimental Evidence from Prisoner's Dilemma Games,"
0036, Boston University - Industry Studies Programme.
- Cooper, Russell & DeJong, Douglas V. & Forsythe, Robert & Ross, Thomas W., 1996. "Cooperation without Reputation: Experimental Evidence from Prisoner's Dilemma Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 187-218, February.
- Cooper, R. & DeJong, D.W. & Ross, T.W., 1992. "Cooperation without Reputation: Experimental Evidence from Prisoner's Dilemma Games," Papers 36, Boston University - Industry Studies Programme.
- repec:att:wimass:9102 is not listed on IDEAS
- David Kreps & Paul Milgrom & John Roberts & Bob Wilson, 2010.
"Rational Cooperation in the Finitely Repeated Prisoners' Dilemma,"
Levine's Working Paper Archive
239, David K. Levine.
- Kreps, David M. & Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John & Wilson, Robert, 1982. "Rational cooperation in the finitely repeated prisoners' dilemma," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 245-252, August.
- repec:att:wimass:9325 is not listed on IDEAS
- Gary E Bolton & Rami Zuwick, 2010.
"Anonymity versus punishments in ultimatum bargaining,"
Levine's Working Paper Archive
826, David K. Levine.
- Bolton Gary E. & Zwick Rami, 1995. "Anonymity versus Punishment in Ultimatum Bargaining," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 95-121, July.
- Andreoni,J. & Croson,R., 1998.
"Partners versus strangers : random rematching in public goods experiments,"
11, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
- Andreoni, James & Croson, Rachel, 2008. "Partners versus Strangers: Random Rematching in Public Goods Experiments," Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, Elsevier.
- James Andreoni & Rachel Croson, 2001. "Partners versus Strangers: Random Rematching in Public Goods Experiments," Levine's Working Paper Archive 563824000000000132, David K. Levine.
- Roth, Alvin E & Schoumaker, Francoise, 1983. "Expectations and Reputations in Bargaining: An Experimental Study," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(3), pages 362-72, June.
- 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.
- Kagel, John H. & Kim, Chung & Moser, Donald, 1996. "Fairness in Ultimatum Games with Asymmetric Information and Asymmetric Payoffs," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 100-110, March.
- Gale, John & Binmore, Kenneth G. & Samuelson, Larry, 1995. "Learning to be imperfect: The ultimatum game," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 56-90.
- Hoffman Elizabeth & McCabe Kevin & Shachat Keith & Smith Vernon, 1994. "Preferences, Property Rights, and Anonymity in Bargaining Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 346-380, November.
- James Andreoni & John H Miller, 1997.
"Rational Cooperation in the finitely repeated prisoner's dilemma: experimental evidence,"
Levine's Working Paper Archive
670, David K. Levine.
- Andreoni, James A & Miller, John H, 1993. "Rational Cooperation in the Finitely Repeated Prisoner's Dilemma: Experimental Evidence," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 103(418), pages 570-85, May.
- Mitzkewitz, Michael & Nagel, Rosemarie, 1993. "Experimental Results on Ultimatum Games with Incomplete Information," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 171-98.
- Rosenthal, R W, 1979. "Sequences of Games with Varying Opponents," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(6), pages 1353-66, November.
- Judith Avrahami & Werner Güth & Ralph Hertwig & Yaakov Kareev & Hironori Otsubo, 2010.
"Learning (Not) To Yield: An Experimental Study of Evolving Ultimatum Game Behavior,"
Jena Economic Research Papers
2010-092, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena, Max-Planck-Institute of Economics.
- Avrahami, Judith & Güth, Werner & Hertwig, Ralph & Kareev, Yaakov & Otsubo, Hironori, 2013. "Learning (not) to yield: An experimental study of evolving ultimatum game behavior," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 47-54.
- Davis, Douglas D. & Wilson, Bart J., 2008.
"Strategic buyers, horizontal mergers and synergies: An experimental investigation,"
International Journal of Industrial Organization,
Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 643-661, May.
- Douglas D. Davis & Bart J. Wilson, 2006. "Strategic Buyers, Horizontal Mergers and Synergies: An Experimental Investigation," Working Papers 0601, VCU School of Business, Department of Economics.
- Jason Shachat & J. Todd Swarthout, 2013. "Auctioning the Right to Play Ultimatum Games and the Impact on Equilibrium Selection," Games, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 4(4), pages 738-753, November.
- Ben D'Exelle & Arno Riedl, 2008.
"Elite Capture, Political Voice and Exclusion from Aid: An Experimental Study,"
CESifo Working Paper Series
2400, CESifo Group Munich.
- D'Exelle, Ben & Riedl, Arno, 2008. "Elite Capture, Political Voice and Exclusion from Aid: An Experimental Study," IZA Discussion Papers 3673, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- Riedl, Arno & Exelle, Ben D, 2008. "Elite Capture, Political Voice and Exclusion from Aid: An Experimental Study," Research Memorandum 024, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
- repec:fee:wpaper:1301 is not listed on IDEAS
- Wu, Diana Yan, 2013. "The impact of repeated interactions on supply chain contracts: A laboratory study," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(1), pages 3-15.
- Tilman Slembeck, 1999. "A Behavioral Approach to Learning in Economics - Towards an Economic Theory of Contingent Learning," Microeconomics 9905001, EconWPA.
- Güth, Werner, 2000. "How ultimatum offers emerge: A study in bounded rationality," SFB 373 Discussion Papers 2000,29, Humboldt University of Berlin, Interdisciplinary Research Project 373: Quantification and Simulation of Economic Processes.
- Tilman Slembeck, 1999. "Low Information Games - Experimental Evidence on Learning in Ultimatum Bargaining," Experimental 9905001, EconWPA.
- Ben D'Exelle & Els Lecoutere & Bjorn Van Campenhout, 2010. "Social status and bargaining when resources are scarce: Evidence from a field lab experiment," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Behavioural and Experimental Social Science (CBESS) 10-09, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
- Tilman Slembeck, 2000. "Learning in Economics: Where Do We Stand?," Microeconomics 0004007, EconWPA.
- Jason Shachat & J. Todd Swarthout, 2013.
"Auctioning the right to play ultimatum games and the impact on equilibrium selection,"
Experimental Economics Center Working Paper Series
2013-01, Experimental Economics Center, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (EconWPA).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.