Loss-Avoidance and Forward Induction in Experimental Coordination Games
The authors report experiments on how players select among multiple Pareto-ranked equilibria in a coordination game. Subjects initially choose inefficient equilibria. Charging a fee to play (which makes initial equilibria money-losing) creates coordination on better equilibria. When fees are optional, improved coordination is consistent with forward induction but coordination improves even when subjects must pay the fee (forward induction does not apply). Subjects appear to use a 'loss-avoidance' selection principle: they expect others to avoid strategies that always result in losses. Loss-avoidance implies that 'mental accounting' of outcomes can affect choices in games. Copyright 1996, the President and Fellows of Harvard College and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Volume (Year): 111 (1996)
Issue (Month): 1 (February)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://mitpress.mit.edu/journals/ |
|Order Information:||Web: http://mitpress.mit.edu/journal-home.tcl?issn=00335533|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:tpr:qjecon:v:111:y:1996:i:1:p:165-94. 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: (Karie Kirkpatrick)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.