IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article

An Experimental Study of Information Revelation Policies in Sequential Auctions

  • Timothy N. Cason

    ()

    (Krannert School of Management, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907)

  • Karthik N. Kannan

    ()

    (Krannert School of Management, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907)

  • Ralph Siebert

    ()

    (Krannert School of Management, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907)

Theoretical models of information asymmetry have identified a trade-off between the desire to learn and the desire to prevent an opponent from learning private information. This paper reports a laboratory experiment that investigates if actual bidders account for this trade-off, using a sequential procurement auction with private cost information and varying information revelation policies. Specifically, the Complete Information Revelation Policy, where all submitted bids are revealed between auctions, is compared to the Incomplete Information Revelation Policy, where only the winning bid is revealed. The experimental results are largely consistent with the theoretical predictions. For example, bidders pool with other types to prevent an opponent from learning significantly more often under a Complete Information Revelation Policy. Also as predicted, the procurer pays less when employing an Incomplete Information Revelation Policy only when the market is highly competitive. Bids are usually more aggressive than the risk-neutral quantitative prediction, which is broadly consistent with risk aversion. This paper was accepted by Teck Ho, decision analysis.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1100.1301
Download Restriction: no

Article provided by INFORMS in its journal Management Science.

Volume (Year): 57 (2011)
Issue (Month): 4 (April)
Pages: 667-688

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:57:y:2011:i:4:p:667-688
Contact details of provider: Postal:
7240 Parkway Drive, Suite 300, Hanover, MD 21076 USA

Phone: +1-443-757-3500
Fax: 443-757-3515
Web page: http://www.informs.org/
Email:


More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. repec:kap:expeco:v:1:y:1998:i:1:p:43-62 is not listed on IDEAS
  2. Dufwenberg, Martin & Gneezy, Uri, 1998. "Price Competition and Market Concentration: An Experimental Study," Working Paper Series 1998:8, Uppsala University, Department of Economics.
  3. Richard Engelbrecht-Wiggans & Elena Katok, 2008. "Regret and Feedback Information in First-Price Sealed-Bid Auctions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(4), pages 808-819, April.
  4. Ravi Bapna & Chrysanthos Dellarocas & Sarah Rice, 2010. "Vertically Differentiated Simultaneous Vickrey Auctions: Theory and Experimental Evidence," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(7), pages 1074-1092, July.
  5. Jeitschko, Thomas D. & Wolfstetter, Elmar, 1998. "Scale economies and the dynamics of recurring auctions," SFB 373 Discussion Papers 1998,62, Humboldt University of Berlin, Interdisciplinary Research Project 373: Quantification and Simulation of Economic Processes.
  6. Cox, James C & Smith, Vernon L & Walker, James M, 1988. "Theory and Individual Behavior of First-Price Auctions," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 61-99, March.
  7. James Andreoni & Yeon-Koo Che & Jinwoo Kim, 2006. "Asymmetric Information about Rivals’ Types in Standard Auctions: An Experiment," Levine's Bibliography 321307000000000293, UCLA Department of Economics.
  8. Miguel A. Costa-Gomes & Georg Weizsäcker, 2004. "Stated Beliefs and Play in Normal Form Games," Levine's Bibliography 122247000000000236, UCLA Department of Economics.
  9. Colin Camerer & Teck-Hua Ho, 1999. "Experience-weighted Attraction Learning in Normal Form Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 67(4), pages 827-874, July.
  10. Urs Fischbacher, 2007. "z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 171-178, June.
  11. Eric S. Maskin & John G. Riley, 1985. "Auction Theory with Private Values," UCLA Economics Working Papers 359, UCLA Department of Economics.
  12. Goeree, Jacob K., 2003. "Bidding for the future: signaling in auctions with an aftermarket," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 108(2), pages 345-364, February.
  13. Dufwenberg, Martin & Gneezy, Uri, 2002. "Information disclosure in auctions: an experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 431-444, August.
  14. Palfrey, Thomas R. & Goeree, Jacob & Holt, Charles, 2000. "Quantal Response Equilibrium and Overbidding in Private-value Auctions," Working Papers 1073, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
  15. Fernando Branco, 1997. "The Design of Multidimensional Auctions," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 28(1), pages 63-81, Spring.
  16. Patrick Bajari & Lixin Ye, 2001. "Competition Versus Collusion in Procurement Auctions: Identification and Testing," Working Papers 01001, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
  17. Dakshina De Silva & Timothy Dunne & Anuruddha Kankanamge & Georgia Kosmopoulou, 2005. "The Impact of Public Information on Bidding in Highway Procurement Auctions," Microeconomics 0511011, EconWPA.
  18. Peter P. Wakker, 2008. "Explaining the characteristics of the power (CRRA) utility family," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(12), pages 1329-1344.
  19. Eric Maskin & John Riley, 2000. "Equilibrium in Sealed High Bid Auctions," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 67(3), pages 439-454.
  20. Ashish Arora & Amy Greenwald & Karthik Kannan & Ramayya Krishnan, 2007. "Effects of Information-Revelation Policies Under Market-Structure Uncertainty," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(8), pages 1234-1248, August.
  21. Charles J. Thomas, 2010. "INFORMATION REVELATION AND BUYER PROFITS IN REPEATED PROCUREMENT COMPETITION -super-," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(1), pages 79-105, 03.
  22. Ying-Ju Chen & Gustavo Vulcano, 2009. "Effects of Information Disclosure Under First- and Second-Price Auctions in a Supply Chain Setting," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 11(2), pages 299-316, September.
  23. Donald B. Hausch, 1986. "Multi-Object Auctions: Sequential vs. Simultaneous Sales," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(12), pages 1599-1610, December.
  24. Sheremeta, Roman, 2009. "Experimental Comparison of Multi-Stage and One-Stage Contests," MPRA Paper 49884, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  25. Ashenfelter, O. & Genesove, D., 1992. "Testing for Price Anomalies in real Estate Auctions," Papers 128, Princeton, Department of Economics - Financial Research Center.
  26. Thomas D. Jeitschko, 1998. "Learning in Sequential Auctions," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 65(1), pages 98-112, July.
  27. Milgrom, Paul R & Weber, Robert J, 1982. "A Theory of Auctions and Competitive Bidding," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(5), pages 1089-1122, September.
  28. Ashenfelter, Orley, 1989. "How Auctions Work for Wine and Art," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 3(3), pages 23-36, Summer.
  29. Krishnan S. Anand & Manu Goyal, 2009. "Strategic Information Management Under Leakage in a Supply Chain," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(3), pages 438-452, March.
  30. Yaw Nyarko & Andrew Schotter, 2002. "An Experimental Study of Belief Learning Using Elicited Beliefs," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(3), pages 971-1005, May.
  31. Charles A. Holt & Susan K. Laury, 2002. "Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1644-1655, December.
  32. Russell Davidson & James MacKinnon, 2000. "Bootstrap tests: how many bootstraps?," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(1), pages 55-68.
  33. Maskin, Eric S & Riley, John G, 1984. "Optimal Auctions with Risk Averse Buyers," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(6), pages 1473-1518, November.
  34. Reinhard Selten, 1998. "Axiomatic Characterization of the Quadratic Scoring Rule," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 43-61, June.
  35. Harrison, Glenn W, 1989. "Theory and Misbehavior of First-Price Auctions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(4), pages 749-62, September.
  36. Huck, Steffen & Normann, Hans-Theo & Oechssler, Jorg, 2004. "Two are few and four are many: number effects in experimental oligopolies," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 53(4), pages 435-446, April.
  37. Ding, Wei & Jeitschko, Thomas D. & Wolfstetter, Elmar G., 2010. "Signal jamming in a sequential auction," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 58-61, July.
  38. Harry J. Paarsch & Stephen G. Donald & Jacques Robert, 2006. "An empirical model of the multi-unit, sequential, clock auction," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(8), pages 1221-1247.
  39. Neugebauer, Tibor & Pezanis-Christou, Paul, 2007. "Bidding behavior at sequential first-price auctions with(out) supply uncertainty: A laboratory analysis," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 55-72, May.
  40. Miguel A. Costa-Gomes & Georg Weizsäcker, 2008. "Stated Beliefs and Play in Normal-Form Games," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 75(3), pages 729-762.
  41. repec:rje:randje:v:37:y:2006:1:p:70-80 is not listed on IDEAS
  42. Das Varma, Gopal, 2003. "Bidding for a process innovation under alternative modes of competition," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 15-37, January.
  43. Thomas Palfrey, 2002. "Quantal Response Equilibrium and Overbidding in Private Value Auctions," Theory workshop papers 357966000000000089, UCLA Department of Economics.
  44. Güth, Werner & Ivanova, Radosveta & Königstein, Manfred & Strobel, Martin, 1999. "Learning to bid: An experimental study of bid function adjustments in auctions and fair division games," SFB 373 Discussion Papers 1999,70, Humboldt University of Berlin, Interdisciplinary Research Project 373: Quantification and Simulation of Economic Processes.
  45. Val E. Lambson & Norman K Thurston, 2006. "Sequential auctions: theory and evidence from the Seattle Fur Exchange," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(1), pages 70-80, 03.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:57:y:2011:i:4:p:667-688. 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: (Mirko Janc)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.