The effect of payoff tables on experimental oligopoly behavior
We explore the effects of the provision of an information-processing instrument—payoff tables—on behavior in experimental oligopolies. In one experimental setting, subjects have access to payoff tables whereas in the other setting they have not. It turns out that this minor variation in presentation has non-negligible effects on participants’ behavior, particularly in the initial phase of the experiment. In the presence of payoff tables, subjects tend to be more cooperative. As a consequence, collusive behavior is more likely and quickly to occur. Copyright Economic Science Association 2012
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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
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.:
- Antoni Bosch-DomËnech & Nicolaas J. Vriend, 2003.
"Imitation of successful behaviour in cournot markets,"
Royal Economic Society, vol. 113(487), pages 495-524, 04.
- Antoni Bosch-Domènech & Nicolaas J. Vriend, 1998. "Imitation of succesful behavior in Cournot markets," Economics Working Papers 269, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, revised May 1999.
- Steffen Huck & Hans-Theo Normann & Jörg Oechssler, 2001.
"Two are Few and Four are Many: Number Effects in Experimental Oligopolies,"
Bonn Econ Discussion Papers
bgse12_2001, University of Bonn, Germany.
- 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.
- Abbink, Klaus & Abdolkarim Sadrieh, 1995. "RatImage - research Assistance Toolbox for Computer-Aided Human Behavior Experiments," Discussion Paper Serie B 325, University of Bonn, Germany.
- Steffen Huck & Hans-Theo Normann & Jörg Oechssler, 2002.
"Stability of the Cournot process - experimental evidence,"
International Journal of Game Theory,
Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 123-136.
- Steffen Huck & Hans-Theo Normann & Joerg Oechssler, 1997. "Stability of the Cournot Process - Experimental Evidence," Experimental 9707002, EconWPA.
- Steffen Huck & Hans-Theo Normann & Jörg Oechssler, 2002. "Stability of the Cournot Process - Experimental Evidence," Bonn Econ Discussion Papers bgse1_2002, University of Bonn, Germany.
- Abbink, Klaus & Brandts, Jordi, 2008. "24. Pricing in Bertrand competition with increasing marginal costs," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 1-31, May.
- Gary Charness & Guillaume R. Frechette & John H. Kagel, 2004.
"How Robust is Laboratory Gift Exchange?,"
Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 189-205, 06.
- Charness, Gary & Frechette, Guillaume R & Kagel, John H, 2002. "How Robust is Laboratory Gift Exchange?," University of California at Santa Barbara, Economics Working Paper Series qt8qq4k3ph, Department of Economics, UC Santa Barbara.
- Theo Offerman & Jan Potters & Joep Sonnemans, 2002.
"Imitation and Belief Learning in an Oligopoly Experiment,"
Review of Economic Studies,
Oxford University Press, vol. 69(4), pages 973-997.
- Offerman, Theo & Potters, Jan & Sonnemans, Joep, 2002. "Imitation and Belief Learning in an Oligopoly Experiment," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 69(4), pages 973-97, October.
- Offerman, T.J.S. & Potters, J.J.M. & Sonnemans, J., 2002. "Imitation and belief learning in an oligopoly experiment," Other publications TiSEM a6a771c5-31ba-4193-8f76-a, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
- Huck, Steffen & Normann, Hans-Theo & Oechssler, Jorg, 1999.
"Learning in Cournot Oligopoly--An Experiment,"
Royal Economic Society, vol. 109(454), pages C80-95, March.
- Klaus Abbink & Heike Hennig-Schmidt, 2002.
"Neutral versus Loaded Instructions in a Bribery Experiment,"
Bonn Econ Discussion Papers
bgse23_2002, University of Bonn, Germany.
- Klaus Abbink & Heike Hennig-Schmidt, 2006. "Neutral versus loaded instructions in a bribery experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 103-121, June.
- Tatsuyoshi, S. & Nakamura, H., 1995. "The 'Spite' Dilema in Voluntary Contribution Mechanism Experiments," ISER Discussion Paper 0370, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
- Levin, Irwin P. & Schneider, Sandra L. & Gaeth, Gary J., 1998. "All Frames Are Not Created Equal: A Typology and Critical Analysis of Framing Effects," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 149-188, November.
- Till Requate & Israel Waichman, 2011. "“A profit table or a profit calculator?” A note on the design of Cournot oligopoly experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 36-46, March.
- R. Cookson, 2000. "Framing Effects in Public Goods Experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 55-79, June.
- Abbink, Klaus & Abdolkarim Sadrieh, 1997. "RatImage 3.30," Discussion Paper Serie B 417, University of Bonn, Germany.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:expeco:v:15:y:2012:i:3:p:499-509. 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: (Guenther Eichhorn)or (Christopher F. Baum)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.