IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ecinqu/v37y1999i4p624-36.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Experimental Investigation of Research Tournaments

Author

Listed:
  • Fullerton, Richard, et al

Abstract

Research tournaments are predicted to encourage R&D. Recent theoretical developments in research tournaments are grounded in search theory. Although the economic intuition behind tournaments is straightforward, computing equilibrium strategies is complex. The participants compute a stopping rule based on the number of participants, the prize and the cost of research. It is an empirical question whether agents will behave as predicted or will employ simple "rule of thumb" strategies such as taking a predetermined number of draws. This paper reports the results of a series of laboratory experiments designed to test the predictions of the search model of tournaments. Copyright 1999 by Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Fullerton, Richard, et al, 1999. "An Experimental Investigation of Research Tournaments," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 37(4), pages 624-636, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ecinqu:v:37:y:1999:i:4:p:624-36
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below 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.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Emmanuel Dechenaux & Dan Kovenock & Roman Sheremeta, 2015. "A survey of experimental research on contests, all-pay auctions and tournaments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(4), pages 609-669, December.
    2. Anja Schöttner, 2008. "Fixed-prize tournaments versus first-price auctions in innovation contests," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 35(1), pages 57-71, April.
    3. Carsten Helm & Anja Schöttner, 2008. "Subsidizing Technological Innovations in the Presence of R&D Spillovers," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 9(3), pages 339-353, August.
    4. Donja Darai & Jens Grosser & Nadja Trhal, 2009. "Patents versus Subsidies � A Laboratory Experiment," SOI - Working Papers 0905, Socioeconomic Institute - University of Zurich.
    5. Ezgi Akar & Sona Mardikyan, 2018. "User Roles and Contribution Patterns in Online Communities: A Managerial Perspective," SAGE Open, , vol. 8(3), pages 21582440187, August.
    6. Brueggemann, Julia & Meub, Lukas, 2015. "Experimental evidence on the effects of innovation contests," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 251, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    7. Mürüvvet Büyükboyacı, 2016. "A Designer'S Choice Between Single-Prize And Parallel Tournaments," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 54(4), pages 1774-1789, October.

    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:oup:ecinqu:v:37:y:1999:i:4:p:624-36. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/weaaaea.html .

    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.