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

Everyone Wants a Chance : Initial Positions and Fairness in Ultimatum Games

Contents:

Author Info

  • Grimalda, Gianluca

    (Universitat Jaume I, Castelló, Spain.)

  • Kar, Anirban

    (Delhi School of Economics, University of Delhi)

  • Proto, Eugenio

    (University of Warwick)

Abstract

Fairness emerges as a relevant factor in redistributive preferences in surveys and experiments. We study experimentally the impact of varying the probability with which players are assigned to initial positions in Ultimatum Games (UGs). In the baseline case players have equal opportunities of being assigned the proposer position –arguably the more advantaged one in UGs. Chances become increasingly unequal across three treatments. We also manipulate the inter-temporal allocation of opportunities over rounds. We find that : (1) The more initial chances are distributed unequally, the lower the acceptance rates of a given offer ; consequently, offers increase ; (2) Being assigned a mere 1% chance of occupying the proposer role compared to none, significantly increases acceptance rates and decreases offers ; (3) Players accept even extreme amounts of unequal chances within each round in exchange for overall equality of opportunities across rounds. Procedural fairness – both static and dynamic - has clear relevance for individuals.

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://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/economics/research/workingpapers/2012/twerp_989.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by University of Warwick, Department of Economics in its series The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) with number 989.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: 2012
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:wrk:warwec:989

Contact details of provider:
Postal: CV4 7AL COVENTRY
Phone: +44 (0) 2476 523202
Fax: +44 (0) 2476 523032
Web page: http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/economics/
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords:

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

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. Gary E. Bolton & Jordi Brandts & Axel Ockenfels, 2000. "Fair Procedures. Evidence from Games Involving Lotteries," UFAE and IAE Working Papers, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC) 483.01, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC).
  2. Hoffman Elizabeth & McCabe Kevin & Shachat Keith & Smith Vernon, 1994. "Preferences, Property Rights, and Anonymity in Bargaining Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 346-380, November.
  3. Corneo, Giacomo & Fong, Christina M., 2007. "What´s the monetary value of distributive justice," Discussion Papers 2007/8, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.
  4. Jean Tirole & Roland Benabou, 2004. "Belief in a Just World and Redistributive Politics," 2004 Meeting Papers, Society for Economic Dynamics 15, Society for Economic Dynamics.
  5. Todd L. Cherry & Peter Frykblom & Jason F. Shogren, 2002. "Hardnose the Dictator," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 92(4), pages 1218-1221, September.
  6. Marwell, Gerald & Ames, Ruth E., 1981. "Economists free ride, does anyone else? : Experiments on the provision of public goods, IV," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 295-310, June.
  7. John List & Todd Cherry, 2000. "Learning to Accept in Ultimatum Games: Evidence from an Experimental Design that Generates Low Offers," Experimental Economics, Springer, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 11-29, June.
  8. Alice Becker & Luis Miller, 2009. "Promoting justice by treating people unequally: an experimental study," Experimental Economics, Springer, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 437-449, December.
  9. Axel Ockenfels & Gary E. Bolton, 2000. "ERC: A Theory of Equity, Reciprocity, and Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 90(1), pages 166-193, March.
  10. Hammond, P.J. & , ., 1987. "Consequentialist foundations for expected utility," CORE Discussion Papers, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE) 1987016, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
  11. Cox, James C., 2004. "How to identify trust and reciprocity," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 260-281, February.
  12. Anand, Paul, 2001. "Procedural fairness in economic and social choice: Evidence from a survey of voters," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 247-270, April.
  13. Karl Schurter & Bart J. Wilson, 2009. "Justice and Fairness in the Dictator Game," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 76(1), pages 130-145, July.
  14. Grimalday, Gianluca & Karz, Anirban & Proto, Eugenio, 2012. "Everyone Wants a Chance: Initial Positions and Fairness in Ultimatum Games," CAGE Online Working Paper Series, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE) 93, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
  15. Karla Hoff & Priyanka Pandey, 2006. "Discrimination, Social Identity, and Durable Inequalities," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 96(2), pages 206-211, May.
  16. Simon Gaechter & Christian Thoeni, 2009. "Social Comparison and Performance: Experimental Evidence on the Fair Wage-Effort Hypothesis," Discussion Papers, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham 2009-23, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
  17. Olivier Armantier, 2006. "Do Wealth Differences Affect Fairness Considerations?," CIRANO Working Papers, CIRANO 2006s-13, CIRANO.
  18. Forsythe Robert & Horowitz Joel L. & Savin N. E. & Sefton Martin, 1994. "Fairness in Simple Bargaining Experiments," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 347-369, May.
  19. Alexander W. Cappelen & Astri Drange Hole & Erik Ø Sørensen & Bertil Tungodden, 2007. "The Pluralism of Fairness Ideals: An Experimental Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 97(3), pages 818-827, June.
  20. Peter A. Diamond, 1967. "Cardinal Welfare, Individualistic Ethics, and Interpersonal Comparison of Utility: Comment," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, University of Chicago Press, vol. 75, pages 765.
  21. Alberto Alesina & George-Marios Angeletos, 2004. "Fairness and Redistribution," NajEcon Working Paper Reviews, www.najecon.org 122247000000000306, www.najecon.org.
  22. Cappelen, Alexander W. & Konow, James & Sørensen, Erik Ø. & Tungodden, Bertil, 2010. "Just Luck: An Experimental Study of Risk Taking and Fairness," Discussion Paper Series in Economics, Department of Economics, Norwegian School of Economics 4/2010, Department of Economics, Norwegian School of Economics.
  23. Edi Karni & Tim Salmon & Barry Sopher, 2008. "Individual sense of fairness: an experimental study," Experimental Economics, Springer, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 174-189, June.
  24. Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, . "A Theory of Fairness, Competition and Cooperation," IEW - Working Papers, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich 004, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
  25. Corneo, Giacomo & Gruner, Hans Peter, 2002. "Individual preferences for political redistribution," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 83(1), pages 83-107, January.
  26. Rabin, Matthew, 1993. "Incorporating Fairness into Game Theory and Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 83(5), pages 1281-1302, December.
  27. Ruben Durante & Louis Putterman, 2007. "Preferences For Redistribution and Perception of Fairness: An Experimental Study," Working Papers 2007-13, Brown University, Department of Economics.
  28. Stefan Trautmann, 2010. "Individual fairness in Harsanyi’s utilitarianism: operationalizing all-inclusive utility," Theory and Decision, Springer, Springer, vol. 68(4), pages 405-415, April.
  29. Gideon Keren & Karl H. Teigen, 2010. "Decisions by coin toss: Inappropriate but fair," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 5(2), pages 83-101, April.
  30. Trautmann, Stefan T. & Wakker, Peter P., 2010. "Process fairness and dynamic consistency," Economics Letters, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 109(3), pages 187-189, December.
  31. Hessel Oosterbeek & Randolph Sloof & Gijs van de Kuilen, 2004. "Cultural differences in ultimatum game experiments: Evidence from a meta-analysis," Experimental, EconWPA 0401003, EconWPA.
  32. Fudenberg, Drew & Lavine, David K., 2012. "Fairness, Risk Preferences and Independence: Impossibility Theorems," Scholarly Articles 11022184, Harvard University Department of Economics.
  33. Justin Esarey & Timothy C. Salmon & Charles Barrilleaux, 2012. "What Motivates Political Preferences? Self-Interest, Ideology, And Fairness In A Laboratory Democracy," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 50(3), pages 604-624, 07.
  34. David Dickinson, 2000. "Ultimatum decision-making: A test of reciprocal kindness," Theory and Decision, Springer, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 151-177, March.
  35. Burrows, Paul & Loomes, Graham, 1994. "The Impact of Fairness on Bargaining Behaviour," Empirical Economics, Springer, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 201-21.
  36. Michal Krawczyk, 2011. "A model of procedural and distributive fairness," Theory and Decision, Springer, Springer, vol. 70(1), pages 111-128, January.
  37. Trautmann, Stefan T., 2009. "A tractable model of process fairness under risk," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 803-813, October.
  38. Binmore, Ken & Morgan, Peter & Snaked, Avner & Sutton, John, 1991. "Do people exploit their bargaining power? An experimental study," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 295-322, August.
  39. La Ferrara, Eliana & Alesina, Alberto, 2005. "Preferences for Redistribution in the Land of Opportunities," Scholarly Articles 4552533, Harvard University Department of Economics.
  40. Samuel Bowles & Herbert Gintis & Melissa Osborne Groves, 2008. "Introduction to Unequal Chances: Family Background and Economic Success
    [Unequal Chances: Family Background and Economic Success]
    ," Introductory Chapters, Princeton University Press, Princeton University Press.
  41. James Konow, 2000. "Fair Shares: Accountability and Cognitive Dissonance in Allocation Decisions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 90(4), pages 1072-1091, September.
  42. Ruffle, Bradley J., 1998. "More Is Better, But Fair Is Fair: Tipping in Dictator and Ultimatum Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 247-265, May.
  43. Robert Slonim & Alvin E. Roth, 1998. "Learning in High Stakes Ultimatum Games: An Experiment in the Slovak Republic," Econometrica, Econometric Society, Econometric Society, vol. 66(3), pages 569-596, May.
  44. Urs Fischbacher, 2007. "z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 171-178, June.
  45. Shaun Hargreaves-Heap & Yanis Varoufakis, 2002. "Some Experimental Evidence On The Evolution Of Discrimination, Co--Operation And Perceptions Of Fairness," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, Royal Economic Society, vol. 112(481), pages 679-703, July.
  46. Edi Karni & Zvi Safra, 2002. "Individual Sense of Justice: A Utility Representation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, Econometric Society, vol. 70(1), pages 263-284, January.
  47. Bruno S. Frey & Alois Stutzer, . "Beyond Outcomes: Measuring Procedural Utility," IEW - Working Papers, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich 076, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
  48. Eckel, Catherine C & Grossman, Philip J, 2001. "Chivalry and Solidarity in Ultimatum Games," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, Western Economic Association International, vol. 39(2), pages 171-88, April.
  49. Fong, Christina, 2001. "Social preferences, self-interest, and the demand for redistribution," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 225-246, November.
  50. Schotter, A. & Weiss, A. & Zapater, I., 1993. "Fairness and Survival in Ultimatum and Dictatorship Games," Working Papers, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University 93-01, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
  51. Machina, Mark J, 1989. "Dynamic Consistency and Non-expected Utility Models of Choice under Uncertainty," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 27(4), pages 1622-68, December.
  52. Michal Krawczyk & Fabrice Le Lec, 2010. "‘Give me a chance!’ An experiment in social decision under risk," Experimental Economics, Springer, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 500-511, December.
  53. Krawczyk, Michal, 2010. "A glimpse through the veil of ignorance: Equality of opportunity and support for redistribution," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 94(1-2), pages 131-141, February.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Blog mentions

As found by EconAcademics.org, the blog aggregator for Economics research:
  1. The weak demand for equal opportunity
    by chris dillow in Stumbling and Mumbling on 2012-05-24 14:31:12
Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as in new window

Cited by:
  1. Grimalday, Gianluca & Karz, Anirban & Proto, Eugenio, 2012. "Everyone Wants a Chance: Initial Positions and Fairness in Ultimatum Games," CAGE Online Working Paper Series, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE) 93, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).

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:wrk:warwec:989. 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: (Helen Neal).

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.