IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jnljam/v2014y2014i1n321958.html

Channels Coordination Game Model Based on Result Fairness Preference and Reciprocal Fairness Preference: A Behavior Game Forecasting and Analysis Method

Author

Listed:
  • Chuan Ding
  • Kaihong Wang
  • Xiaoying Huang

Abstract

In a distribution channel, channel members are not always self‐interested, but altruistic in some conditions. Based on this assumption, this paper adopts a behavior game method to analyze and forecast channel members’ decision behavior based on result fairness preference and reciprocal fairness preference by embedding a fair preference theory in channel research of coordination. The behavior game forecasts that a channel can achieve coordination if channel members consider behavior elements. Using the behavior game theory model we established, we can prove that if retailers only consider the result fairness preference and they are not jealous of manufacturers’ benefit, manufacturers will be more friendly to retailers. In such case, the total utility of the channel is higher compared with that of self‐interest channel, and the utility of channel members is Pareto improved. If both manufactures and retailers consider reciprocal fairness preference, the manufacturers will give a lower wholesale price to the retailers. In return, the retailers will also reduce retail prices. Therefore, the total utility of the channels will not be less than the total utility of the channel coordination, as long as the reciprocity wholesale prices meet certain conditions.

Suggested Citation

  • Chuan Ding & Kaihong Wang & Xiaoying Huang, 2014. "Channels Coordination Game Model Based on Result Fairness Preference and Reciprocal Fairness Preference: A Behavior Game Forecasting and Analysis Method," Journal of Applied Mathematics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2014(1).
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jnljam:v:2014:y:2014:i:1:n:321958
    DOI: 10.1155/2014/321958
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/321958
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1155/2014/321958?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yu-Chung Tsao & Tsung-Hui Chen & Pei-Ying Wu, 2013. "Effects of Lot‐Sizing Integration and Learning Effect on Managing Imperfect Items in a Manufacturer‐Retailer Chain," Journal of Applied Mathematics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2013(1).
    2. Chui-Yu Chiu & Yi Lin & Ming-Feng Yang, 2014. "Applying Fuzzy Multiobjective Integrated Logistics Model to Green Supply Chain Problems," Journal of Applied Mathematics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2014(1).
    3. Bolton, Gary E, 1991. "A Comparative Model of Bargaining: Theory and Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(5), pages 1096-1136, December.
    4. Pinhas Zusman & Michael Etgar, 1981. "The Marketing Channel as an Equilibrium Set of Contracts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 284-302, March.
    5. Arnaud De Bruyn & Gary E. Bolton, 2008. "Estimating the Influence of Fairness on Bargaining Behavior," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(10), pages 1774-1791, October.
    6. Yu-Chung Tsao & Tsung-Hui Chen & Pei-Ying Wu, 2013. "Effects of Lot-Sizing Integration and Learning Effect on Managing Imperfect Items in a Manufacturer-Retailer Chain," Journal of Applied Mathematics, Hindawi, vol. 2013, pages 1-11, December.
    7. Holmstrom, Bengt & Milgrom, Paul, 1987. "Aggregation and Linearity in the Provision of Intertemporal Incentives," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(2), pages 303-328, March.
    8. Teck-Hua Ho & Juanjuan Zhang, 2008. "Designing Pricing Contracts for Boundedly Rational Customers: Does the Framing of the Fixed Fee Matter?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(4), pages 686-700, April.
    9. You-Hua Chen & Xiao-Wei Wen, 2013. "Vertical Cooperative Advertising with Substitute Brands," Journal of Applied Mathematics, Hindawi, vol. 2013, pages 1-8, October.
    10. Gang Xie & Wuyi Yue & Shouyang Wang, 2014. "Quality Improvement Policies in a Supply Chain with Stackelberg Games," Journal of Applied Mathematics, Hindawi, vol. 2014, pages 1-9, February.
    11. Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, 1999. "A Theory of Fairness, Competition, and Cooperation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(3), pages 817-868.
    12. You-Hua Chen & Xiao-Wei Wen, 2013. "Vertical Cooperative Advertising with Substitute Brands," Journal of Applied Mathematics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2013(1).
    13. Geanakoplos, John & Pearce, David & Stacchetti, Ennio, 1989. "Psychological games and sequential rationality," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 60-79, March.
    14. Christoph H. Loch & Yaozhong Wu, 2008. "Social Preferences and Supply Chain Performance: An Experimental Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(11), pages 1835-1849, November.
    15. Gang Xie & Wuyi Yue & Shouyang Wang, 2014. "Quality Improvement Policies in a Supply Chain with Stackelberg Games," Journal of Applied Mathematics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2014(1).
    16. Haifeng Zhao & Bin Lin & Wanqing Mao & Yang Ye, 2014. "Differential Game Analyses of Logistics Service Supply Chain Coordination by Cost Sharing Contract," Journal of Applied Mathematics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2014(1).
    17. Chui-Yu Chiu & Yi Lin & Ming-Feng Yang, 2014. "Applying Fuzzy Multiobjective Integrated Logistics Model to Green Supply Chain Problems," Journal of Applied Mathematics, Hindawi, vol. 2014, pages 1-12, July.
    18. Guangdong Wu & Qingshan Kong & Jian-gang Shi & Hamid Reza Karimi & Wei Zhang, 2014. "Information Sharing and Channel Construction of Supply Chain under Asymmetric Demand Information," Journal of Applied Mathematics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2014(1).
    19. Haifeng Zhao & Bin Lin & Wanqing Mao & Yang Ye, 2014. "Differential Game Analyses of Logistics Service Supply Chain Coordination by Cost Sharing Contract," Journal of Applied Mathematics, Hindawi, vol. 2014, pages 1-10, April.
    20. Rabin, Matthew, 1993. "Incorporating Fairness into Game Theory and Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(5), pages 1281-1302, December.
    21. Guangdong Wu & Qingshan Kong & Jian-gang Shi & Hamid Reza Karimi & Wei Zhang, 2014. "Information Sharing and Channel Construction of Supply Chain under Asymmetric Demand Information," Journal of Applied Mathematics, Hindawi, vol. 2014, pages 1-8, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Đula, Ivan & Größler, Andreas, 2021. "Inequity aversion in dynamically complex supply chains," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(1), pages 309-322.
    2. van Damme, Eric & Binmore, Kenneth G. & Roth, Alvin E. & Samuelson, Larry & Winter, Eyal & Bolton, Gary E. & Ockenfels, Axel & Dufwenberg, Martin & Kirchsteiger, Georg & Gneezy, Uri & Kocher, Martin G, 2014. "How Werner Güth's ultimatum game shaped our understanding of social behavior," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 292-318.
    3. Du, Shaofu & Nie, Tengfei & Chu, Chengbin & Yu, Yugang, 2014. "Reciprocal supply chain with intention," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(2), pages 389-402.
    4. Fehr, Ernst & Schmidt, Klaus M., 2005. "The Economics of Fairness, Reciprocity and Altruism – Experimental Evidence and New Theories," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 66, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.
    5. Avrahami, Judith & Güth, Werner & Kareev, Yaakov, 2001. "The parasite game: Exploiting the abundance of nature in face of competition," SFB 373 Discussion Papers 2001,34, Humboldt University of Berlin, Interdisciplinary Research Project 373: Quantification and Simulation of Economic Processes.
    6. Giovanni Di Bartolomeo & Stefano Papa, 2013. "Measuring trust, reciprocity and altruism by counterfactuals," CIMEO Working Paper Series 99, Centre for Investigation and Modelling of Experimental Observations (CIMEO).
    7. Klaus M. Schmidt, 2011. "Social Preferences and Competition," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 43, pages 207-231, August.
    8. Kovarik, Jaromir, 2009. "Social Preferences - Literature Survey," IKERLANAK 2009-36, Universidad del País Vasco - Departamento de Fundamentos del Análisis Económico I.
    9. Liang, Nuobu & Zhang, Qingyu, 2026. "A differential game of ingredient branding supply chain with Nash bargaining fairness concern," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    10. Stefano Papa, 2011. "Oltre l'egoismo: L'approccio comportamentale alle preferenze," CIMEO Working Paper Series 77, Centre for Investigation and Modelling of Experimental Observations (CIMEO).
    11. Hu, Benyong & Meng, Chao & Xu, Dong & Son, Young-Jun, 2018. "Supply chain coordination under vendor managed inventory-consignment stocking contracts with wholesale price constraint and fairness," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 21-31.
    12. Elena Katok & Diana Yan Wu, 2009. "Contracting in Supply Chains: A Laboratory Investigation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(12), pages 1953-1968, December.
    13. Emin Karagözoğlu & Ümit Barış Urhan, 2017. "The Effect of Stake Size in Experimental Bargaining and Distribution Games: A Survey," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 285-325, March.
    14. Klaus M. Schmidt, 2011. "Social Preferences and Competition," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 43(s1), pages 207-231, August.
    15. Christoph H. Loch & Yaozhong Wu, 2008. "Social Preferences and Supply Chain Performance: An Experimental Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(11), pages 1835-1849, November.
    16. Werner Güth & Stefan Napel, 2006. "Inequality Aversion in a Variety of Games - An Indirect Evolutionary Analysis," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 116(514), pages 1037-1056, October.
    17. Güth, Werner, 2000. "Robust learning experiments: Evidence for learning and deliberation," SFB 373 Discussion Papers 2000,82, Humboldt University of Berlin, Interdisciplinary Research Project 373: Quantification and Simulation of Economic Processes.
    18. Kaihong Wang & Xu Yang & Yiwan Sun & Chuan Ding, 2014. "A Comparative Study of Marketing Channel Multiagent Stackelberg Model Based on Perfect Rationality and Fairness Preference," Abstract and Applied Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2014(1).
    19. Dufwenberg, Martin & Gneezy, Uri, 2000. "Measuring Beliefs in an Experimental Lost Wallet Game," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 163-182, February.
    20. Potters, Jan & Sefton, Martin & Vesterlund, Lise, 2005. "After you--endogenous sequencing in voluntary contribution games," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(8), pages 1399-1419, August.

    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:wly:jnljam:v:2014:y:2014:i:1:n:321958. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/4185 .

    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.