IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/germec/v18y2017i4p444-467.html

Blindfolded vs. Informed Ultimatum Bargaining – A Theoretical and Experimental Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Güth Werner

    (Libera Università Internazionale degli Studi Sociali (LUISS) Max Planck Institute for Collective Goods,Roma, Italy)

  • Pull Kerstin

    (School of Business and Economics, University of Tübingen,Tübingen, Germany)

  • Stadler Manfred

    (School of Business and Economics, University of Tübingen,Tübingen, Germany)

  • Zaby Alexandra K.

    (School of Business and Economics, University of Tübingen,Tübingen, Germany)

Abstract

This paper analyzes blindfolded vs. informed ultimatum bargaining where proposer and responder are both either uninformed or informed about the size of the pie. Considering the transition from one information setting to another suggests that more information induces lower (higher) price offers and acceptance thresholds when the pie is small (large). While our experimental data confirm this transition effect, risk aversion leads to diverging results in blindfolded ultimatum bargaining where task-independent strategies such as ‘equal sharing’ or the ‘golden mean’ are implemented more frequently.

Suggested Citation

  • Güth Werner & Pull Kerstin & Stadler Manfred & Zaby Alexandra K., 2017. "Blindfolded vs. Informed Ultimatum Bargaining – A Theoretical and Experimental Analysis," German Economic Review, De Gruyter, vol. 18(4), pages 444-467, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:germec:v:18:y:2017:i:4:p:444-467
    DOI: 10.1111/geer.12112
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/geer.12112
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/geer.12112?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Jennie Huang & Judd B. Kessler & Muriel Niederle, 2024. "Fairness has less impact when agents are less informed," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 27(1), pages 155-174, March.
    2. Federica Alberti & Werner Güth & Kei Tsutsui, 2020. "Experimental effects of institutionalizing co-determination by a procedurally fair bidding rule," Working Papers in Economics & Finance 2020-10, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth Business School, Economics and Finance Subject Group.
    3. El Mouaaouy Florian & Riepe Jan, 2018. "Benford and the Internal Capital Market: A Useful Indicator of Managerial Engagement," German Economic Review, De Gruyter, vol. 19(3), pages 309-329, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:germec:v:18:y:2017:i:4:p:444-467. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyterbrill.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.