IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/r/feb/framed/00144.html
   My bibliography  Save this item

Bidding in common value auctions: How the commercial construction industry corrects for the winner's curse

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as


Cited by:

  1. Cooper David J, 2006. "Are Experienced Managers Experts at Overcoming Coordination Failure?," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 1-52, May.
  2. Boone, Audra L. & Harold Mulherin, J., 2008. "Do auctions induce a winner's curse? New evidence from the corporate takeover market," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1), pages 1-19, July.
  3. Wilson, William W. & Dahl, Bruce L., 2000. "Import Tenders And Bidding Strategies In Wheat," Agricultural Economics Reports 23285, North Dakota State University, Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics.
  4. Raquel García-García & Esteban García-Canal & Mauro F. Guillén, 2019. "International Dispersion and Profitability: An Institution-Based Approach," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 59(6), pages 855-888, December.
  5. Jarl G. Kallberg & Crocker H. Liu & Adam Nowak, 2021. "An Empirical Analysis of Double Round Auctions," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 49(2), pages 531-555, June.
  6. Etan A. Green & Justin M. Rao & David Rothschild, 2019. "A Sharp Test of the Portability of Expertise," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(6), pages 2820-2831, June.
  7. Tharun Dolla & Boeing Laishram, 2019. "Bundling in public–private partnership projects – a conceptual framework," International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 69(6), pages 1177-1203, December.
  8. João Adelino Ribeiro & Paulo Jorge Pereira & Elísio Brandão, 2013. "Volume Uncertainty in Construction Projects: a Real Options Approach," CEF.UP Working Papers 1309, Universidade do Porto, Faculdade de Economia do Porto.
  9. Glenn W. Harrison & John A. List, 2004. "Field Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(4), pages 1009-1055, December.
  10. Zonna, Davide, 2016. "Sprechi di cibo e tentativi di riduzione. Un caso sperimentale [Avoiding food waste. A field experiment]," MPRA Paper 76097, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  11. Joel O. Wooten & Joan M. Donohue & Timothy D. Fry & Kathleen M. Whitcomb, 2020. "To Thine Own Self Be True: Asymmetric Information in Procurement Auctions," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(7), pages 1679-1701, July.
  12. Stefan Seifert & Silke Hüttel, 2023. "Is there a risk of a winner’s curse in farmland auctions?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 50(3), pages 1140-1177.
  13. Potters, Jan & van Winden, Frans, 2000. "Professionals and students in a lobbying experiment: Professional rules of conduct and subject surrogacy," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 499-522, December.
  14. Glenn W. Harrison & John A. List, 2008. "Naturally Occurring Markets and Exogenous Laboratory Experiments: A Case Study of the Winner's Curse," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(528), pages 822-843, April.
  15. John Raftery, 1999. "Quasi-rational behaviour in the property and construction market," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(1), pages 21-27.
  16. Maurizio Canavari & Andreas C. Drichoutis & Jayson L. Lusk & Rodolfo M. Nayga, Jr., 2018. "How to run an experimental auction: A review of recent advances," Working Papers 2018-5, Agricultural University of Athens, Department Of Agricultural Economics.
  17. Steven D. Levitt & John A. List, 2007. "Viewpoint: On the generalizability of lab behaviour to the field," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(2), pages 347-370, May.
  18. Bosman, Ronald & Kräussl, Roman & Mirgorodskaya, Elizaveta, 2015. "The "tone effect" of news on investor beliefs: An experimental approach," CFS Working Paper Series 522, Center for Financial Studies (CFS).
  19. Ronald M. Harstad & Aleksandar Saša Pekeč, 2008. "Relevance to Practice and Auction Theory: A Memorial Essay for Michael Rothkopf," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 38(5), pages 367-380, October.
  20. Levati, Maria Vittoria & Miettinen, Topi & Rai, Birendra, 2011. "Context and interpretation in laboratory experiments: The case of reciprocity," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 846-856.
  21. T. Ballinger & Eric Hudson & Leonie Karkoviata & Nathaniel Wilcox, 2011. "Saving behavior and cognitive abilities," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 14(3), pages 349-374, September.
  22. Alan Mehlenbacher, 2007. "Multiagent System Platform for Auction Simulations," Department Discussion Papers 0706, Department of Economics, University of Victoria.
  23. Lauren Chenarides & Carola Grebitus & Jayson L Lusk & Iryna Printezis, 2022. "A calibrated choice experiment method [Combining revealed and stated preference methods for valuing environmental amenities]," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 49(5), pages 971-1004.
  24. J B Atkinson, 2004. "On the economic tender quantity," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 55(8), pages 884-891, August.
  25. João Adelino Ribeiro & Paulo Jorge Pereira & Elisio Moreira Brandão, 2020. "A real options approach to optimal bidding in construction projects considering volume uncertainty," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(4), pages 631-640, June.
  26. Ellen Garbarino & Robert Slonim, 2007. "Preferences and decision errors in the winner’s curse," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 241-257, June.
IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.