Reciprocity—an indirect evolutionary analysis
This paper investigates strategic interaction between rational agents whose preferences evolve over time. Players face a pecuniary �game of life� comprising the ultimatum game and the dictator game. Utility may but need not be attached to the reciprocation of fair and unfair play by the opponent and equitable payoff distributions as proposed by Falk and Fischbacher (2001). Evolutionary fitness is determined solely by material success � regardless of the motives for its achievement. Agents cannot explicitly condition the social component of their preferences on whether they face the ultimatum or dictator game. Under these conditions, agents develop a strong preference for reciprocation but little interest in an equitable distribution as such. This corresponds to equitable ultimatum offers but full surplus appropriation by dictators. Adding an exogenous constraint on the possible divergence between preference for reciprocation and for an equitable distribution either makes ultimatum divisions asymmetric or dictators become generous depending on the relative frequency of ultimatum and dictator interaction.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
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.
Volume (Year): 17 (2007)
Issue (Month): 5 (October)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://link.springer.de/link/service/journals/00191/index.htm|
|Order Information:||Web: http://link.springer.de/orders.htm|
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.:
- JÃrg Oechssler & Frank Riedel, 2001.
"Evolutionary dynamics on infinite strategy spaces,"
Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 141-162.
- Oechssler, Joerg & Frank Riedel, 1999. "Evolutionary Dynamics on Infinite Strategy Spaces," Discussion Paper Serie A 606, University of Bonn, Germany.
- Oechssler, Jörg & Riedel, Frank, 1998. "Evolutionary dynamics on infinite strategy spaces," SFB 373 Discussion Papers 1998,68, Humboldt University of Berlin, Interdisciplinary Research Project 373: Quantification and Simulation of Economic Processes.
- Joerg Oechssler & Frank Riedel, 1998. "Evolutionary Dynamics on Infinite Strategy Spaces," Game Theory and Information 9805002, EconWPA, revised 12 May 1998.
- Stahl, Dale O. & Haruvy, Ernan, 2008. "Level-n bounded rationality in two-player two-stage games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 41-61, January.
- Benaim, Michel & Weibull, Jörgen W., 2000.
"Deterministic Approximation of Stochastic Evolution in Games,"
Working Paper Series
534, Research Institute of Industrial Economics, revised 30 Oct 2001.
- Michel BenaÔm & J–rgen W. Weibull, 2003. "Deterministic Approximation of Stochastic Evolution in Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(3), pages 873-903, 05.
- Falk Armin & Kosfeld Michael, 2012.
"It's all about Connections: Evidence on Network Formation,"
Review of Network Economics,
De Gruyter, vol. 11(3), pages 1-36, September.
- Falk, Armin & Kosfeld, Michael, 2003. "It's All About Connections: Evidence on Network Formation," CEPR Discussion Papers 3970, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Falk, Armin & Kosfeld, Michael, 2003. "It's all about Connections: Evidence on Network Formation," IZA Discussion Papers 777, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- Armin Falk, Michael Kosfeld, . "It's all about Connections: Evidence on Network Formation," IEW - Working Papers 146, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
- S. Huck & J. Oechssler, 1996.
"The Indirect Evolutionary Approach To Explaining Fair Allocations,"
SFB 373 Discussion Papers
1996,13, Humboldt University of Berlin, Interdisciplinary Research Project 373: Quantification and Simulation of Economic Processes.
- Huck, Steffen & Oechssler, Jorg, 1999. "The Indirect Evolutionary Approach to Explaining Fair Allocations," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 13-24, July.
- Steffen Huck & Joerg Oechssler, 1995. "The Indirect Evolutionary Approach to Explaining Fair Allocations," Game Theory and Information 9507001, EconWPA, revised 27 Aug 1998.
- Werner Güth & Stefan Napel, 2006.
"Inequality Aversion in a Variety of Games - An Indirect Evolutionary Analysis,"
Royal Economic Society, vol. 116(514), pages 1037-1056, October.
- Werner Güth & Stefan Napel, . "Inequality Aversion in a Variety of Games - An Indirect Evolutionary Analysis -," Papers on Strategic Interaction 2002-23, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group.
- Geanakoplos, John & Pearce, David & Stacchetti, Ennio, 1989. "Psychological games and sequential rationality," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 60-79, March.
- Samuelson, Larry, 2001. "Introduction to the Evolution of Preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 97(2), pages 225-230, April.
- Siegfried Berninghaus & Werner Güth & Hartmut Kliemt, . "From Teleology to Evolution Bridging the gap between rationality and adaptation in social explanation," Papers on Strategic Interaction 2002-24, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:joevec:v:17:y:2007:i:5:p:579-603. 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.