IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v55y2009i8p1423-1437.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ultimatum Deadlines

Author

Listed:
  • Wenjie Tang

    () (Decision Sciences Area, INSEAD, Singapore 138676, Singapore)

  • J. Neil Bearden

    () (Decision Sciences Area, INSEAD, Singapore 138676, Singapore)

  • Ilia Tsetlin

    () (Decision Sciences Area, INSEAD, Singapore 138676, Singapore)

Abstract

An important characteristic of any offer is the deadline at which it expires. We consider an ultimatum deadline game in which the proposer's decision variable is the offer deadline, while the responder faces a standard finite-horizon search problem. We show that the responder's strategy is characterized by a shortest acceptable deadline: at the time of deadline, he accepts an offer if the deadline is longer than his shortest acceptable deadline, and rejects it otherwise. If the proposer has all information available to the responder, the optimal deadline is the responder's shortest acceptable deadline. If the proposer is uncertain about the responder's situation, the optimal deadline gets longer, unless this uncertainty is very large. After normative analysis of the deadline setting problem, we present results from a behavioral study of the game. The average shortest acceptable deadline set by the responders equals the one that would maximize the expected value, whereas the proposers tend to set deadlines that are too short. The prescriptive conclusion for a proposer, emerging from the model and the experiment, is that in case of uncertainty it is better to set a deadline longer than what would be optimal if uncertainty were ignored.

Suggested Citation

  • Wenjie Tang & J. Neil Bearden & Ilia Tsetlin, 2009. "Ultimatum Deadlines," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(8), pages 1423-1437, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:55:y:2009:i:8:p:1423-1437
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1090.1034
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Seale, Darryl A. & Daniel, Terry E. & Rapoport, Amnon, 2001. "The information advantage in two-person bargaining with incomplete information," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 177-200, February.
    2. Lippman, Steven A. & McCall, John J., 1976. "Job search in a dynamic economy," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 365-390, June.
    3. Christopher Avery & Christine Jolls & Richard Posner & Alvin E. Roth, 2007. "The New Market for Federal Judicial Law Clerks," NBER Working Papers 13213, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Stigler, George J., 2011. "Economics of Information," Economic Policy, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, vol. 5, pages 35-49.
    5. Guth, Werner & Huck, Steffen & Muller, Wieland, 2001. "The Relevance of Equal Splits in Ultimatum Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 161-169, October.
    6. Gerard J. van den Berg, 1990. "Nonstationarity in Job Search Theory," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 57(2), pages 255-277.
    7. Roth, Alvin E & Xing, Xiaolin, 1997. "Turnaround Time and Bottlenecks in Market Clearing: Decentralized Matching in the Market for Clinical Psychologists," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(2), pages 284-329, April.
    8. Jordi Brandts & Gary Charness, 2000. "Hot vs. Cold: Sequential Responses and Preference Stability in Experimental Games," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 2(3), pages 227-238, March.
    9. Blount, Sally & Bazerman, Max H., 1996. "The inconsistent evaluation of absolute versus comparative payoffs in labor supply and bargaining," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 227-240, August.
    10. Chun, Young H., 1999. "Selecting the best choice in the full information group interview problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 119(3), pages 635-651, December.
    11. Satterthwaite, Mark A. & Williams, Steven R., 1989. "Bilateral trade with the sealed bid k-double auction: Existence and efficiency," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 107-133, June.
    12. Alvin E Roth & Muriel Niederle, 2007. "Making Markets Thick: Designing Rules for Offers and Acceptances," Levine's Bibliography 843644000000000142, UCLA Department of Economics.
    13. Oxoby, Robert J. & McLeish, Kendra N., 2004. "Sequential decision and strategy vector methods in ultimatum bargaining: evidence on the strength of other-regarding behavior," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 84(3), pages 399-405, September.
    14. Karni, Edi & Schwartz, Aba, 1977. "Search theory: The case of search with uncertain recall," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 38-52, October.
    15. Roth, Alvin E & Xing, Xiaolin, 1994. "Jumping the Gun: Imperfections and Institutions Related to the Timing of Market Transactions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(4), pages 992-1044, September.
    16. Sutter, Matthias & Kocher, Martin & Strau[ss], Sabine, 2003. "Bargaining under time pressure in an experimental ultimatum game," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 81(3), pages 341-347, December.
    17. J. Neil Bearden & Amnon Rapoport & Ryan O. Murphy, 2006. "Sequential Observation and Selection with Rank-Dependent Payoffs: An Experimental Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(9), pages 1437-1449, September.
    18. Cox, James C & Oaxaca, Ronald L, 1989. "Laboratory Experiments with a Finite-Horizon Job-Search Model," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 2(3), pages 301-329, September.
    19. Timothy N. Cason & Vai-Lam Mui, 1998. "Social Influence in the Sequential Dictator Game," Monash Economics Working Papers archive-37, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    20. Li, Hao & Rosen, Sherwin, 1998. "Unraveling in Matching Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(3), pages 371-387, June.
    21. Mortensen, Dale T, 1970. "Job Search, the Duration of Unemployment, and the Phillips Curve," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 60(5), pages 847-862, December.
    22. Chun, Young H. & Moskowitz, Herbert & Plante, Robert D., 1994. "Dynamic programming formulation of the group interview problem with a general utility function," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 78(1), pages 81-92, October.
    23. O. Ashenfelter & R. Layard (ed.), 1987. "Handbook of Labor Economics," Handbook of Labor Economics, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 2, number 2.
    24. Wing Suen, 2000. "A Competitive Theory of Equilibrium and Disequilibrium Unravelling in Two-Sided Matching," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 31(1), pages 101-120, Spring.
    25. Gronau, Reuben, 1971. "Information and Frictional Unemployment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 61(3), pages 290-301, June.
    26. Hao Li & Wing Suen, 2004. "Self-Fulfilling Early-Contracting Rush," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 45(1), pages 301-324, February.
    27. O. Ashenfelter & R. Layard (ed.), 1987. "Handbook of Labor Economics," Handbook of Labor Economics, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1.
    28. Jeannette Brosig & Joachim Weimann & Chun-Lei Yang, 2003. "The Hot Versus Cold Effect in a Simple Bargaining Experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 6(1), pages 75-90, June.
    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. Güth, Werner & Kocher, Martin G., 2014. "More than thirty years of ultimatum bargaining experiments: Motives, variations, and a survey of the recent literature," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 396-409.
    2. Güth, Werner & Kocher, Martin G., 2014. "More than thirty years of ultimatum bargaining experiments: Motives, variations, and a survey of the recent literature," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 396-409.
    3. Dinko Dimitrov & Saptarshi Mukherjee & Nozomu Muto, 2016. "‘Divide-and-choose’ in list-based decision problems," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 81(1), pages 17-31, June.

    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:inm:ormnsc:v:55:y:2009:i:8:p:1423-1437. 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 Walls). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.