IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/joepsy/v27y2006i5p609-621.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Finding the key: The riddle of focal points

Author

Listed:
  • Sugden, Robert
  • Zamarron, Ignacio E.

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Sugden, Robert & Zamarron, Ignacio E., 2006. "Finding the key: The riddle of focal points," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 609-621, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:joepsy:v:27:y:2006:i:5:p:609-621
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167-4870(06)00047-X
    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. Sugden, Robert, 1995. "A Theory of Focal Points," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 105(430), pages 533-550, May.
    2. Nash, John, 1950. "The Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), pages 155-162, April.
    3. Maarten Janssen, 2001. "Rationalizing Focal Points," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 119-148, March.
    4. Colin F. Camerer & Teck-Hua Ho & Juin-Kuan Chong, 2004. "A Cognitive Hierarchy Model of Games," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(3), pages 861-898.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Bosch-Domènech, Antoni & Vriend, Nicolaas J., 2013. "On the role of non-equilibrium focal points as coordination devices," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 52-67.
    2. Nicolas Bardsley & Judith Mehta & Chris Starmer & Robert Sugden, 2006. "The Nature of Salience Revisited: Cognitive Hierarchy Theory versus Team Reasoning," Discussion Papers 2006-17, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    3. Alessandro Sontuoso & Sudeep Bhatia, 2021. "A notion of prominence for games with natural‐language labels," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(1), pages 283-312, January.
    4. Nicholas Bardsley & Judith Mehta & Chris Starmer & Robert Sugden, 2010. "Explaining Focal Points: Cognitive Hierarchy Theory "versus" Team Reasoning," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 120(543), pages 40-79, March.
    5. Daskalova, Vessela & Vriend, Nicolaas J., 2021. "Learning frames," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 78-96.
    6. Bosch-Domènech, Antoni & Vriend, Nicolaas J., 2013. "On the role of non-equilibrium focal points as coordination devices," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 52-67.
    7. Schmidt, Robert J., 2019. "Capitalizing on the (false) consensus effect: Two tractable methods to elicit private information," Working Papers 0669, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    8. Alberti, Federica & Sugden, Robert & Tsutsui, Kei, 2012. "Salience as an emergent property," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 379-394.
    9. Pope, Devin G. & Pope, Jaren C. & Sydnor, Justin R., 2015. "Focal points and bargaining in housing markets," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 89-107.
    10. Alós-Ferrer, Carlos & Kuzmics, Christoph, 2013. "Hidden symmetries and focal points," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(1), pages 226-258.
    11. Alessandra Smerilli, 2012. "We-thinking and vacillation between frames: filling a gap in Bacharach’s theory," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 73(4), pages 539-560, October.
    12. David Dickinson & Lynn Hunnicutt, 2010. "Nonbinding recommendations: the relative effects of focal points versus uncertainty reduction on bargaining outcomes," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 69(4), pages 615-634, October.
    13. Sanjeev Goyal & Penélope Hernández & Guillem Martínez-Cánovas & Frédéric Moisan & Manuel Muñoz-Herrera & Angel Sánchez, 2021. "Integration and diversity," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(2), pages 387-413, June.
      • Goyal, S. & Hernández, P. & Muñnez-Cánovasz, G. & Moisan, F. & Muñoz-Herrera, M. & Sánchez, A., 2017. "Integration and Diversity," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1721, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
      • Sanjeev Goyal & Penélope Hernández & Guillem Martínez-Cánovas & Frederic Moisan & Manuel Muñoz-Herrera & Angel Sánchez, 2021. "Integration and Diversity," Post-Print hal-03188210, HAL.
      • Sanjeev Goyal & Penelope Hernandez & Guillem Martinez-Canovas & Frederic Moisan & Manuel Munoz-Herrera & Angel Sanchez, 2019. "Integration and Diversity," Working Papers 20190025, New York University Abu Dhabi, Department of Social Science, revised Sep 2020.
      • Sanjeev Goyal & Pénélope Hernández & Guillem Martínez-Cánovas & Frédéric Moisan & Manuel Muñoz-Herrera & Ángel Sánchez, 2021. "Integration and diversity," Post-Print halshs-03051962, HAL.
    14. Fahrenberger, Theresa & Gersbach, Hans, 2010. "Minority voting and long-term decisions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 329-345, July.
    15. Joško Sindik & Nives Vidak, 2008. "Application of Game Theory in Describing Efficacy of Decision Making in Sportsman's Tactical Performance in Team Sports," Interdisciplinary Description of Complex Systems - scientific journal, Croatian Interdisciplinary Society Provider Homepage: http://indecs.eu, vol. 6(1), pages 53-66.
    16. Colin F. Camerer & Gideon Nave & Alec Smith, 2019. "Dynamic Unstructured Bargaining with Private Information: Theory, Experiment, and Outcome Prediction via Machine Learning," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(4), pages 1867-1890, April.
    17. Teng, Jimmy, 2018. "Schelling Point as a Refinement of Nash Equilibrium," Conference Papers 10484, Graduate School of Management, St. Petersburg State University.
    18. Maria Demertzis & Nicola Viegi, 2008. "Inflation Targets as Focal Points," International Journal of Central Banking, International Journal of Central Banking, vol. 4(1), pages 55-87, March.
    19. Federica Alberti & Edward J. Cartwright, 2016. "Full agreement and the provision of threshold public goods," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 166(1), pages 205-233, January.
    20. Leland, Jonathan W. & Schneider, Mark, 2018. "A theory of focal points in 2 × 2 games," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 75-89.

    More about this item

    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:eee:joepsy:v:27:y:2006:i:5:p:609-621. 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/joep .

    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.