Less Rationality, More Efficiency: a Laboratory Experiment on "Lemons" Markets
AbstractIn this paper we experimentally test a theory of boundedly rational behavior in a "lemons market." We analyzed two different market designs, for which perfect rationality implies complete and partial market collapse, respectively. Our empirical observations deviate substantially from these predictions of rational choice theory: Even after 20 repetitions, the actual outcome is closer to efficiency than expected. Our bounded rationality approach to explaining these observations starts with the insight that perfect rationality would require the players to perform an infinite number of iterative reasoning steps. Boundedly rational players, however, carry out only a limited number of such iterations. We have determined the iteration type of the players independently from their market behavior. A significant correlation exists between the iteration types and the observed price offers. --
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 Saarland University, CSLE - Center for the Study of Law and Economics in its series CSLE Discussion Paper Series with number 2004-02 [rev.].
Date of creation: 2004
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Postfach 151150, 66041 Saarbrücken
Phone: *49(0)681-302 2132
Fax: *49(0)681-302 3591
Web page: http://www.uni-saarland.de/fak1/fr12/csle/
More information through EDIRC
guessing games; beauty contests; market failure; adverse selection; lemon problem; regulatory failure; paternalistic regulation;
Other versions of this item:
- Kirstein, Annette & Kirstein, Roland, 2004. "Less Rationality, More Efficiency: a Laboratory Experiment on "Lemon" Markets," CSLE Discussion Paper Series 2004-02, Saarland University, CSLE - Center for the Study of Law and Economics.
- D8 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty
- C7 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory
- B4 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology
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.:
- Antoni Bosch-Dom?nech & Jose Garcia-Montalvo & Rosemarie Nagel & Albert Satorra, 2002.
"One, two, (three), infinity: Newspaper and lab beauty-contest experiments,"
Artefactual Field Experiments
00011, The Field Experiments Website.
- Antoni Bosch-Dom�nech & Jos� G. Montalvo & Rosemarie Nagel & Albert Satorra, 2002. "One, Two, (Three), Infinity, ...: Newspaper and Lab Beauty-Contest Experiments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1687-1701, December.
- Rosemarie Nagel & Antoni Bosch-Domènech & Albert Satorra & José García Montalvo, 1999. "One, two, (three), infinity: Newspaper and lab beauty-contest experiments," Economics Working Papers 438, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
- Schotter, Andrew & Weigelt, Keith & Wilson, Charles, 1990.
"A Laboratory Investigation Of Multi-Person Rationality And Presentation Effects,"
90-24, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
- Schotter Andrew & Weigelt Keith & Wilson Charles, 1994. "A Laboratory Investigation of Multiperson Rationality and Presentation Effects," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 445-468, May.
- T. Randolph Beard & Richard O. Beil, 1994. "Do People Rely on the Self-Interested Maximization of Others? An Experimental Test," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(2), pages 252-262, February.
- Rosenthal, Robert W., 1981. "Games of perfect information, predatory pricing and the chain-store paradox," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 92-100, August.
- Jacob K. Goeree & Charles A. Holt, 2000.
"Ten Little Treasures of Game Theory and Ten Intuitive Contradictions,"
Virginia Economics Online Papers
333, University of Virginia, Department of Economics.
- Jacob K. Goeree & Charles A. Holt, 2001. "Ten Little Treasures of Game Theory and Ten Intuitive Contradictions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1402-1422, December.
- Jacob K Goeree & Charles A Holt, 2004. "Ten Little Treasures of Game Theory and Ten Intuitive Contradictions," Levine's Working Paper Archive 618897000000000900, David K. Levine.
- Nagel, Rosemarie, 1995. "Unraveling in Guessing Games: An Experimental Study," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(5), pages 1313-26, December.
- McKelvey, Richard D & Palfrey, Thomas R, 1992. "An Experimental Study of the Centipede Game," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(4), pages 803-36, July.
- Colin F. Camerer, 1997. "Progress in Behavioral Game Theory," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 11(4), pages 167-188, Fall.
- Stiglitz, Joseph E & Weiss, Andrew, 1981. "Credit Rationing in Markets with Imperfect Information," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(3), pages 393-410, June.
- Roland Kirstein & Annette Kirstein, .
"Europäischer Verbraucherschutz – Ausdruck grenzenloser Regulierungswut oder sinnvoller Schutz für Käufer? Erkenntnisse aus einem Laborexperiment,"
German Working Papers in Law and Economics
2006-1-1160, Berkeley Electronic Press.
- Kirstein, Roland & Kirstein, Annette, 2006. "Europäischer Verbraucherschutz - Ausdruck grenzenloser Regulierungswut oder sinnvoller Schutz für Käufer? Erkenntnisse aus einem Laborexperiment," CSLE Discussion Paper Series 2006-08, Saarland University, CSLE - Center for the Study of Law and Economics.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.