Exploring Behavior: An Ultimatum Experiment
In phase 1 of our experiment every participant plays the ultimatum game with each of the other five group members, each taking the role of proposer and responder. For each of the offers one learns how many participants would have accepted it. The pie is 30 times larger in phase 2. It thus pays to explore response behavior in phase 1 by choosing different offers in order to exploit responders in phase 2. Such experimentation is useless, however, if one wants to play fair, e.g. 50:50, or if one believes in the game theoretic solution. Sixty-one participants out of 77 (only those participants were included in the analysis who correctly answered the control question and whose responder strategy in phase 2 was monotonous) engaged in experimentation by submitting different offers in phase 1, whereas the remaining 16 participants submitted equal offers. Thirteen participants not engaged in experimentation divided equally, whereas the remaining 3 participants offered the smallest positive fraction of the pie.
To our knowledge, this item is not available for
download. To find whether it is available, there are three
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.
Volume (Year): 18 (2001)
Issue (Month): ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Von-Melle-Park 5, 20146 Hamburg|
Phone: 49 40 42838-4457
Fax: 49 40 42838-6329
Web page: http://www.uni-hamburg.de/fachbereiche-einrichtungen/fb03/ise/index.html
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hom:homoec:v:18:y:2001:p:353-375. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Matthew Braham)The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Matthew Braham to update the entry or send us the correct email address
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.