IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/indorg/v28y2010i5p522-525.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A note comparing the capacity setting performance of the Kreps-Scheinkman duopoly model with the Cournot duopoly model in a laboratory setting

Author

Listed:
  • Goodwin, David
  • Mestelman, Stuart

Abstract

The paper reports the results of 39 laboratory duopoly markets for which pricing institution and participant experience are treatments. Cournot (C) duopolies (quantity precommitment and a price determined to clear the market) are contrasted with Kreps-Scheinkman (KS) duopolies (quantity precommitment and posted prices). Inexperienced participants in KS markets have much more difficulty selecting capacities consistent with the theoretical predictions than do those in C markets. With experience, the differences disappear.

Suggested Citation

  • Goodwin, David & Mestelman, Stuart, 2010. "A note comparing the capacity setting performance of the Kreps-Scheinkman duopoly model with the Cournot duopoly model in a laboratory setting," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 28(5), pages 522-525, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:indorg:v:28:y:2010:i:5:p:522-525
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167-7187(10)00003-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Boccard, Nicolas & Wauthy, Xavier, 2000. "Bertrand competition and Cournot outcomes: further results," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 279-285, September.
    2. Sigrid Suetens & Jan Potters, 2007. "Bertrand colludes more than Cournot," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(1), pages 71-77, March.
    3. Davis, Douglas D., 1999. "Advance production and Cournot outcomes: an experimental investigation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 59-79, September.
    4. Muren, Astri, 2000. "Quantity precommitment in an experimental oligopoly market," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 147-157, February.
    5. Vital Anderhub & Werner Güth & Ulrich Kamecke & Hans-Theo Normann, 2003. "Capacity Choices and Price Competition in Experimental Markets," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 6(1), pages 27-52, June.
    6. Yin, Xiangkang & Ng, Yew-Kwang, 1997. "Quantity Precommitment and Bertrand Competition Yield Cournot Outcomes: A Case with Product Differentiation," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(68), pages 14-22, June.
    7. Carl Davidson & Raymond Deneckere, 1986. "Long-Run Competition in Capacity, Short-Run Competition in Price, and the Cournot Model," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(3), pages 404-415, Autumn.
    8. David M. Kreps & Jose A. Scheinkman, 1983. "Quantity Precommitment and Bertrand Competition Yield Cournot Outcomes," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 14(2), pages 326-337, Autumn.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Orland, Andreas & Selten, Reinhard, 2016. "Buyer power in bilateral oligopolies with advance production: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 31-42.
    2. Jacobs, Martin & Requate, Till, 2016. "Bertrand-Edgeworth markets with increasing marginal costs and voluntary trading: Experimental evidence," Economics Working Papers 2016-01, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Department of Economics.
    3. Kyle Hampton & Katerina Sherstyuk, 2012. "Demand shocks, capacity coordination, and industry performance: lessons from an economic laboratory," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 43(1), pages 139-166, March.
    4. Jan Potters & Sigrid Suetens, 2013. "Oligopoly Experiments In The Current Millennium," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 439-460, July.
    5. Jacobs Martin, 2016. "Number of Firms, Rationing, Matching, and Knowledge: A Comprehensive Study of Variations in Experimental Kreps–Scheinkman Markets," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 16(3), pages 1273-1319, September.
    6. Amr Farahat & Woonghee Tim Huh & Hongmin Li, 2019. "On the Relationship Between Quantity Precommitment and Cournot Games," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 67(1), pages 109-122, January.
    7. Mongoljin Batsaikhan & Norovsambuu Tumennasan, 2018. "Output Decisions and Price Matching: Theory and Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(8), pages 3609-3624, August.
    8. Silveira, Douglas & Vasconcelos, Silvinha, 2020. "Essays on duopoly competition with asymmetric firms: Is profit maximization always an evolutionary stable strategy?," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 225(C).
    9. Jason J. Lepore & Aric P. Shafran, 2013. "Consumer Rationing and Cournot Outcomes: Experimental Evidence," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 79(3), pages 727-746, January.
    10. Jacobs, Martin, 2016. "Number of firms, rationing, matching, and knowledge: A comprehensive study of variations in experimental Kreps-Scheinkman markets," Economics Working Papers 2016-02, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Department of Economics.
    11. HIGASHIDA Keisaku, 2018. "Subsidies to Public Firms and Competition Modes under a Mixed Duopoly," Discussion papers 18001, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. David Goodwin & Stuart Mestelman, 2002. "Advance Production Duopolies and Posted Prices or Market-Clearing Prices," Department of Economics Working Papers 2002-07, McMaster University.
    2. Jason J. Lepore & Aric P. Shafran, 2013. "Consumer Rationing and Cournot Outcomes: Experimental Evidence," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 79(3), pages 727-746, January.
    3. Jacobs, Martin, 2016. "Number of firms, rationing, matching, and knowledge: A comprehensive study of variations in experimental Kreps-Scheinkman markets," Economics Working Papers 2016-02, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Department of Economics.
    4. Vital Anderhub & Werner Güth & Ulrich Kamecke & Hans-Theo Normann, 2003. "Capacity Choices and Price Competition in Experimental Markets," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 6(1), pages 27-52, June.
    5. Orland, Andreas & Selten, Reinhard, 2016. "Buyer power in bilateral oligopolies with advance production: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 31-42.
    6. Dean V. Williamson & Céline Jullien & Lynne Kiesling & Carine Staropoli, 2006. "Investment Incentives and Market Power: An Experimental Analysis," EAG Discussions Papers 200605, Department of Justice, Antitrust Division.
    7. Jan Potters & Sigrid Suetens, 2013. "Oligopoly Experiments In The Current Millennium," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 439-460, July.
    8. Andreas Nicklisch, 2008. "Semi-collusive advertising and pricing in experimental duopolies," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2008_25, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    9. Raluca Parvulescu & Nicolas Vaneecloo, 2014. "Concurrence et expérimentations de marché, un débat clos ? Un état des lieux pour un nouveau programme de recherche," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 124(3), pages 317-360.
    10. Mongoljin Batsaikhan & Norovsambuu Tumennasan, 2018. "Output Decisions and Price Matching: Theory and Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(8), pages 3609-3624, August.
    11. Le Coq, Chloé & Sturluson, Jon Thor, 2012. "Does opponents’ experience matter? Experimental evidence from a quantity precommitment game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 265-277.
    12. Wenzel, Tobias & Normann, Hans-Theo, 2015. "Shrouding add-on information: an experimental study," VfS Annual Conference 2015 (Muenster): Economic Development - Theory and Policy 113149, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    13. Simon Loertscher, 2005. "Market making oligopoly," Diskussionsschriften dp0512, Universitaet Bern, Departement Volkswirtschaft.
    14. Jacobs, Martin & Requate, Till, 2016. "Bertrand-Edgeworth markets with increasing marginal costs and voluntary trading: Experimental evidence," Economics Working Papers 2016-01, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Department of Economics.
    15. Marie-Laure Cabon-Dhersin & Nicolas Drouhin, 2020. "A general model of price competition with soft capacity constraints," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 70(1), pages 95-120, July.
    16. Werner Güth & Manfred Stadler & Alexandra Zaby, 2020. "Capacity precommitment, communication, and collusive pricing: theoretical benchmark and experimental evidence," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 49(2), pages 495-524, June.
    17. Simon Loertscher & Leslie Marx, 2014. "An Oligopoly Model for Analyzing and Evaluating (Re)-Assignments of Spectrum Licenses," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 45(3), pages 245-273, November.
    18. Kyle Hampton & Katerina Sherstyuk, 2012. "Demand shocks, capacity coordination, and industry performance: lessons from an economic laboratory," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 43(1), pages 139-166, March.
    19. Tasnádi, Attila & Bakó, Barna, 2014. "A Kreps-Scheinkman-állítás érvényessége lineáris keresletű vegyes duopóliumok esetén [The Kreps and Scheinkman result remains valid for mixed duopolies with linear demand]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(5), pages 533-543.
    20. HIGASHIDA Keisaku, 2018. "Subsidies to Public Firms and Competition Modes under a Mixed Duopoly," Discussion papers 18001, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).

    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:eee:indorg:v:28:y:2010:i:5:p:522-525. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505551 .

    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.