IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/f/pka359.html
   My authors  Follow this author

Emin Karagözoğlu
(Emin Karagozoglu)

Personal Details

First Name:Emin
Middle Name:
Last Name:Karagozoglu
Suffix:
RePEc Short-ID:pka359
[This author has chosen not to make the email address public]
http://sites.google.com/site/eminkaragozoglu
Bilkent University, Department of Economics, Bilkent 06800, Ankara / Turkey
(+90) 312 290 1955
Terminal Degree: (from RePEc Genealogy)

Affiliation

İktisat Bölümü
Bilkent Üniversitesi

Ankara, Turkey
http://econ.bilkent.edu.tr/
RePEc:edi:debiltr (more details at EDIRC)

Research output

as
Jump to: Working papers Articles Chapters Books

Working papers

  1. Deren Caglayan & Emin Karagözoglu & Kerim Keskin & Cagri Saglam, 2020. "Effort Comparisons for a Class of Four-Player Tournaments," CESifo Working Paper Series 8761, CESifo.
  2. Emin Karagözoglu & Cagri Saglam & Agah R. Turan, 2020. "Tullock Brings Perseverance and Suspense to Tug-of-War," CESifo Working Paper Series 8103, CESifo.
  3. Serhat Dogan & Emin Karagözoglu & Kerim Keskin & Cagri Saglam, 2020. "Bribing in Team Contests," CESifo Working Paper Series 8096, CESifo.
  4. Emin Karagözoglu & Kerim Keskin & Cagri Saglam, 2020. "Race Meets Bargaining in Product Development," CESifo Working Paper Series 8109, CESifo.
  5. Zafer Akýn & Emin Karagözoðlu, 2015. "The Role of Goals and Feedback in Incentivizing Performance," IPEK Working Papers 1506, Ipek University, Department of Economics, revised Aug 2015.
  6. Emin Karagözoglu & Martin G. Kocher, 2015. "Bargaining under Time Pressure," CESifo Working Paper Series 5685, CESifo.
  7. Gerards, R. & Muysken, J. & Welters, R.A.M.H.M., 2010. "Active labor market policy by a profit maximizing firm," Research Memorandum 042, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
  8. Karagozoglu, E., 2010. "A dynamic model of decision-making under cognitive dissonance and modularity of mind," Research Memorandum 014, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
  9. Emin Karagözoglu & Arno Riedl, 2010. "Information, Uncertainty, and Subjective Entitlements in Bargaining," CESifo Working Paper Series 3133, CESifo.
  10. Itai Ashlagi & Emin Karagozoglu & Bettina Klaus, 2008. "A Noncooperative Support for Equal Division in Estate Division Problems," Harvard Business School Working Papers 09-069, Harvard Business School.
  11. Karagozoglu, E., 2008. "Distributive concerns in the bankruptcy problem with an endogenous estate," Research Memorandum 032, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
  12. Karagozoglu, E., 2008. "A noncooperative approach to bankruptcy problems with an endogeneous estate," Research Memorandum 031, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
  13. Flesch, J. & Karagozoglu, E. & Perea ý Monsuwé, A., 2007. "Optimal search for a moving target with the option to wait," Research Memorandum 051, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).

Articles

  1. Serhat Doğan & Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin & Çağrı Sağlam, 2023. "Large Tullock contests," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 140(2), pages 169-179, October.
  2. Serhat Doğan & Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin & Hüseyin Çağrı Sağlam, 2023. "Titans that Clash and a State that Buffers," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 67(2-3), pages 210-234, February.
  3. Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin & Çağrı Sağlam, 2023. "(In)efficiency and equitability of equilibrium outcomes in a family of bargaining games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 52(1), pages 175-193, March.
  4. Emin Karagözoğlu & Elif Tosun, 2022. "Endogenous Game Choice and Giving Behavior in Distribution Games," Games, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-32, November.
  5. Deren Çağlayan & Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin & Çağrı Sağlam, 2022. "Effort comparisons for a class of four-player tournaments," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 59(1), pages 119-137, July.
  6. Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin & Çağrı Sağlam, 2021. "Race meets bargaining in product development," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(3), pages 702-709, April.
  7. Tarık Kara & Emin Karagözoğlu & Elif Özcan-Tok, 2021. "Bargaining, Reference Points, and Limited Influence," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 326-362, June.
  8. Doğan, Serhat & Karagözoğlu, Emin & Keskin, Kerim & Sağlam, Çağrı, 2021. "Bribing in team contests," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 1-9.
  9. Emin Karagözoğlu & Shiran Rachmilevitch, 2021. "Costly Preparations in Bargaining," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 123(2), pages 532-557, April.
  10. Karagözoğlu, Emin & Sağlam, Çağrı & Turan, Agah R., 2021. "Perseverance and suspense in tug-of-war," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
  11. Emin Karagözoğlu & Martin G. Kocher, 2019. "Bargaining under time pressure from deadlines," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(2), pages 419-440, June.
  12. Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin & Elif Özcan-Tok, 2019. "Between anchors and aspirations: a new family of bargaining solutions," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 23(1), pages 53-73, June.
  13. Emin Karagözoğlu & Shiran Rachmilevitch, 2018. "Implementing egalitarianism in a class of Nash demand games," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 85(3), pages 495-508, October.
  14. Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin, 2018. "Endogenous reference points in bargaining," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 88(2), pages 283-295, October.
  15. Karagözoğlu, Emin & Keskin, Kerim, 2018. "Time-varying fairness concerns, delay, and disagreement in bargaining," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 115-128.
  16. Doğan, Serhat & Karagözoğlu, Emin & Keskin, Kerim & Sağlam, Çağrı, 2018. "Multi-player race," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 123-136.
  17. 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.
  18. Zafer Akın & Emin Karagözoğlu, 2017. "The Role of Goals and Feedback in Incentivizing Performance," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(2), pages 193-211, March.
  19. Bolton, Gary E. & Karagözoğlu, Emin, 2016. "On the influence of hard leverage in a soft leverage bargaining game: The importance of credible claims," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 164-179.
  20. Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin, 2015. "A Tale of Two Bargaining Solutions," Games, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-14, June.
  21. Emin Karagözoğlu & Arno Riedl, 2015. "Performance Information, Production Uncertainty, and Subjective Entitlements in Bargaining," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(11), pages 2611-2626, November.
  22. Emin Karagözoğlu, 2014. "A noncooperative approach to bankruptcy problems with an endogenous estate," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 217(1), pages 299-318, June.
  23. Esat Cetemen & Emin Karagözoğlu, 2014. "Implementing equal division with an ultimatum threat," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 77(2), pages 223-236, August.
  24. Karagözoğlu, Emin & Keskin, Kerim & Sağlam, Çağrı, 2013. "A minimally altruistic refinement of Nash equilibrium," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 66(3), pages 422-430.
  25. Ashlagi, Itai & Karagözoğlu, Emin & Klaus, Bettina, 2012. "A non-cooperative support for equal division in estate division problems," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 63(3), pages 228-233.
  26. János Flesch & Emin Karagözoǧlu & Andrés Perea, 2009. "Optimal search for a moving target with the option to wait," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 56(6), pages 526-539, September.

Chapters

  1. Emin Karagözoğlu & Kyle B. Hyndman, 2022. "Introduction," Springer Books, in: Emin Karagözoğlu & Kyle B. Hyndman (ed.), Bargaining, chapter 0, pages 1-7, Springer.

Books

  1. Emin Karagözoğlu & Kyle B. Hyndman (ed.), 2022. "Bargaining," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-030-76666-5, September.

Citations

Many of the citations below have been collected in an experimental project, CitEc, where a more detailed citation analysis can be found. These are citations from works listed in RePEc that could be analyzed mechanically. So far, only a minority of all works could be analyzed. See under "Corrections" how you can help improve the citation analysis.

Working papers

  1. Deren Caglayan & Emin Karagözoglu & Kerim Keskin & Cagri Saglam, 2020. "Effort Comparisons for a Class of Four-Player Tournaments," CESifo Working Paper Series 8761, CESifo.

    Cited by:

    1. Lauber, Arne & March, Christoph & Sahm, Marco, 2022. "Optimal and fair prizing in sequential round-robin tournaments: Experimental evidence," BERG Working Paper Series 176, Bamberg University, Bamberg Economic Research Group.
    2. Serhat Doğan & Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin & Çağrı Sağlam, 2023. "Large Tullock contests," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 140(2), pages 169-179, October.

  2. Emin Karagözoglu & Cagri Saglam & Agah R. Turan, 2020. "Tullock Brings Perseverance and Suspense to Tug-of-War," CESifo Working Paper Series 8103, CESifo.

    Cited by:

    1. Karagözoğlu, Emin & Sağlam, Çağrı & Turan, Agah R., 2021. "Perseverance and suspense in tug-of-war," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).

  3. Zafer Akýn & Emin Karagözoðlu, 2015. "The Role of Goals and Feedback in Incentivizing Performance," IPEK Working Papers 1506, Ipek University, Department of Economics, revised Aug 2015.

    Cited by:

    1. Nafziger, Julia & Koch, Alexander K, 2019. "Motivational Goal Bracketing: An Experiment," CEPR Discussion Papers 13806, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    2. Markus Jung & Mischa Seiter, 2021. "Towards a better understanding on mitigating algorithm aversion in forecasting: an experimental study," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 495-516, December.
    3. Dalmia, Prateik & Filiz-Ozbay, Emel, 2021. "Your success is my motivation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 49-85.
    4. James Fan & Joaquín Gómez‐Miñambres & Samuel Smithers, 2020. "Make it too difficult, and I'll give up; let me succeed, and I'll excel: The interaction between assigned and personal goals," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(6), pages 964-975, September.
    5. Hoffmann, Christin & Thommes, Kirsten, 2020. "Can digital feedback increase employee performance and energy efficiency in firms? Evidence from a field experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 49-65.

  4. Emin Karagözoglu & Martin G. Kocher, 2015. "Bargaining under Time Pressure," CESifo Working Paper Series 5685, CESifo.

    Cited by:

    1. Lindner, Florian & Rose, Julia, 2017. "No need for more time: Intertemporal allocation decisions under time pressure," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 53-70.
    2. Bolton, Gary E. & Karagözoğlu, Emin, 2016. "On the influence of hard leverage in a soft leverage bargaining game: The importance of credible claims," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 164-179.
    3. Anbarci, Nejat & Feltovich, Nick, 2018. "How fully do people exploit their bargaining position? The effects of bargaining institution and the 50–50 norm," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 320-334.
    4. Federica Alberti & Sven Fischer & Werner Güth & Kei Tsutsui, 2018. "Concession Bargaining," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 62(9), pages 2017-2039, October.

  5. Gerards, R. & Muysken, J. & Welters, R.A.M.H.M., 2010. "Active labor market policy by a profit maximizing firm," Research Memorandum 042, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).

    Cited by:

    1. Chen, Yu-Fu & Funke, Michael, 2010. "Global Warming And Extreme Events: Rethinking The Timing And Intensity Of Environmental Policy," SIRE Discussion Papers 2010-48, Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE).
    2. Cörvers, Frank & Reinold, Julia & Chakkar, Saena & Bolzonella, Francesco & Ronda, Vera, 2021. "Literature review labour migration," ROA Technical Report 005, Maastricht University, Research Centre for Education and the Labour Market (ROA).

  6. Emin Karagözoglu & Arno Riedl, 2010. "Information, Uncertainty, and Subjective Entitlements in Bargaining," CESifo Working Paper Series 3133, CESifo.

    Cited by:

    1. Anita Gantner & Rudolf Kerschbamer, 2013. "Fairness and Efficiency in a Subjective Claims Problem," Working Papers 2013-30, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    2. Mitesh Kataria & Natalia Montinari, 2012. "Risk, Entitlements and Fairness Bias: Explaining Preferences for Redistribution in Multi-person Setting," Jena Economics Research Papers 2012-061, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    3. Fabian Paetzel & Rupert Sausgruber & Stefan Traub, 2014. "Social Preferences and Voting on Reform: An Experimental Study," Department of Economics Working Papers wuwp172, Vienna University of Economics and Business, Department of Economics.
    4. Rodriguez-Lara, Ismael, 2016. "Equity and bargaining power in ultimatum games," MPRA Paper 72700, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Anita Gantner & Kristian Horn & Rudolf Kerschbamer, 2013. "Fair Division in Unanimity Bargaining with Subjective Claims," Working Papers 2013-31, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.

  7. Itai Ashlagi & Emin Karagozoglu & Bettina Klaus, 2008. "A Noncooperative Support for Equal Division in Estate Division Problems," Harvard Business School Working Papers 09-069, Harvard Business School.

    Cited by:

    1. Karagozoglu, E., 2010. "A noncooperative approach to bankruptcy problems with an endogenous estate," Research Memorandum 027, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    2. Mariotti, Marco & Wen, Quan, 2021. "A noncooperative foundation of the competitive divisions for bads," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    3. Soo-Haeng Cho & Christopher S. Tang, 2014. "Technical Note---Capacity Allocation Under Retail Competition: Uniform and Competitive Allocations," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 62(1), pages 72-80, February.
    4. Karagözoğlu, Emin & Keskin, Kerim & Sağlam, Çağrı, 2013. "A minimally altruistic refinement of Nash equilibrium," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 66(3), pages 422-430.
    5. Ashlagi, Itai & Karagözoğlu, Emin & Klaus, Bettina, 2012. "A non-cooperative support for equal division in estate division problems," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 63(3), pages 228-233.
    6. Thomson, William, 2015. "Axiomatic and game-theoretic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: An update," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 41-59.
    7. Greil, Stefan & Schwarz, Christian & Stein, Stefan, "undated". "Perceived Fairness in the Taxation of a Digital Business Model [Fairness und die Besteuerung digitaler Geschäftsmodelle]," Duesseldorf Working Papers in Applied Management and Economics 47, Duesseldorf University of Applied Sciences.
    8. Esat Cetemen & Emin Karagözoğlu, 2014. "Implementing equal division with an ultimatum threat," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 77(2), pages 223-236, August.
    9. Urs Fischbacher & Nadja Kairies-Schwarz & Ulrike Stefani, 2017. "Non-additivity and the Salience of Marginal Productivities: Experimental Evidence on Distributive Fairness," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 84(336), pages 587-610, October.
    10. Anita Gantner & Kristian Horn & Rudolf Kerschbamer, 2013. "Fair Division in Unanimity Bargaining with Subjective Claims," Working Papers 2013-31, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    11. Doudou Gong & Genjiu Xu & Xuanzhu Jin & Loyimee Gogoi, 2022. "A sequential partition method for non-cooperative games of bankruptcy problems," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 30(2), pages 359-379, July.
    12. Emin Karagözoğlu & Shiran Rachmilevitch, 2018. "Implementing egalitarianism in a class of Nash demand games," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 85(3), pages 495-508, October.
    13. Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin & Çağrı Sağlam, 2023. "(In)efficiency and equitability of equilibrium outcomes in a family of bargaining games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 52(1), pages 175-193, March.
    14. Shiran Rachmilevitch, 2020. "Rewarding moderate behavior in a dynamic Nash Demand Game," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 49(2), pages 639-650, June.

  8. Karagozoglu, E., 2008. "Distributive concerns in the bankruptcy problem with an endogenous estate," Research Memorandum 032, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).

    Cited by:

    1. Karagozoglu, E., 2010. "A noncooperative approach to bankruptcy problems with an endogenous estate," Research Memorandum 027, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    2. Thomson, William, 2015. "Axiomatic and game-theoretic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: An update," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 41-59.

  9. Karagozoglu, E., 2008. "A noncooperative approach to bankruptcy problems with an endogeneous estate," Research Memorandum 031, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).

    Cited by:

    1. Cappelen, Alexander W. & Luttens, Roland I. & Sørensen, Erik Ø. & Tungodden, Bertil, 2015. "Fairness in bankruptcy situations: an experimental study," Discussion Paper Series in Economics 17/2015, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Economics.
    2. Büyükboyacı, Mürüvvet & Gürdal, Mehmet Y. & Kıbrıs, Arzu & Kıbrıs, Özgür, 2019. "An experimental study of the investment implications of bankruptcy laws," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 607-629.
    3. Koster, Maurice & Boonen, Tim J., 2019. "Constrained stochastic cost allocation," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 20-30.
    4. Boonen, Tim J., 2019. "Equilibrium recoveries in insurance markets with limited liability," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 38-45.
    5. Schumacher, Johannes M., 2021. "Ex-ante estate division under strong Pareto efficiency," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 10-24.
    6. Doudou Gong & Genjiu Xu & Xuanzhu Jin & Loyimee Gogoi, 2022. "A sequential partition method for non-cooperative games of bankruptcy problems," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 30(2), pages 359-379, July.
    7. Karagozoglu, E., 2008. "Distributive concerns in the bankruptcy problem with an endogenous estate," Research Memorandum 032, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    8. J. Arin & V. Feltkamp & M. Montero, 2015. "A bargaining procedure leading to the serial rule in games with veto players," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 229(1), pages 41-66, June.

  10. Flesch, J. & Karagozoglu, E. & Perea ý Monsuwé, A., 2007. "Optimal search for a moving target with the option to wait," Research Memorandum 051, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).

    Cited by:

    1. Benoit Duvocelle & János Flesch & Hui Min Shi & Dries Vermeulen, 2021. "Search for a moving target in a competitive environment," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 50(2), pages 547-557, June.
    2. Benoit Duvocelle & J'anos Flesch & Mathias Staudigl & Dries Vermeulen, 2020. "A competitive search game with a moving target," Papers 2008.12032, arXiv.org.

Articles

  1. Serhat Doğan & Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin & Hüseyin Çağrı Sağlam, 2023. "Titans that Clash and a State that Buffers," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 67(2-3), pages 210-234, February.

    Cited by:

    1. Serhat Doğan & Kerim Keskin & Çağrı Sağlam, 2023. "Analyzing strategic behavior in a dynamic model of bargaining and war," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 140(3), pages 233-257, December.

  2. Emin Karagözoğlu & Elif Tosun, 2022. "Endogenous Game Choice and Giving Behavior in Distribution Games," Games, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-32, November.

    Cited by:

    1. Valerio Capraro & Roberto Di Paolo & Veronica Pizziol, 2023. "Assessing Large Language Models' ability to predict how humans balance self-interest and the interest of others," Papers 2307.12776, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2024.

  3. Deren Çağlayan & Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin & Çağrı Sağlam, 2022. "Effort comparisons for a class of four-player tournaments," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 59(1), pages 119-137, July.
    See citations under working paper version above.
  4. Emin Karagözoğlu & Shiran Rachmilevitch, 2021. "Costly Preparations in Bargaining," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 123(2), pages 532-557, April.

    Cited by:

    1. Sarah Auster & Nenad Kos & Salvatore Piccolo, 2021. "Optimal pricing, private information and search for an outside offer," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 52(4), pages 758-777, December.
    2. Houba, Harold & Li, Duozhe & Wen, Quan, 2022. "Bargaining with costly competition for the right to propose," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    3. Manuel A. Utset, 2023. "Time-Inconsistent Bargaining and Cross-Commitments," Games, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-21, April.

  5. Emin Karagözoğlu & Martin G. Kocher, 2019. "Bargaining under time pressure from deadlines," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(2), pages 419-440, June.

    Cited by:

    1. Fabio Galeotti & Maria Montero & Anders Poulsen, 2018. "The Attraction and Compromise Effects in Bargaining: Experimental Evidence," Post-Print halshs-01820223, HAL.
    2. Burns, Nathaniel A. & Deck, Cary A. & Thomas, Charles J., 2023. "Experimental analysis of impatience in bilateral and multilateral negotiations," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    3. Grewenig, Elisabeth & Lergetporer, Philipp & Werner, Katharina & Woessmann, Ludger, 2019. "Incentives, Search Engines, and the Elicitation of Subjective Beliefs: Evidence From Representative Online Survey Experiments," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 146, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    4. Dilmaghani, Maryam, 2020. "Gender differences in performance under time constraint: Evidence from chess tournaments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    5. Cao, Qian & Li, Jianbiao & Niu, Xiaofei, 2022. "Tempus fugit: The impact of time constraint on investor behavior," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 67-81.
    6. Tarık Kara & Emin Karagözoğlu & Elif Özcan-Tok, 2021. "Bargaining, Reference Points, and Limited Influence," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 326-362, June.
    7. Baranski, Andrzej & Haas, Nicholas, 2023. "The timing of communication and retaliation in bargaining: An experimental study," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    8. Feltovich, Nick, 2019. "Is earned bargaining power more fully exploited?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 152-180.
    9. Niu, Xiaofei & Li, Jianbiao, 2019. "How Time Constraint Affects the Disposition Effect?," EconStor Preprints 194618, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    10. Wei Zhang & Jingqi Wang & Reza Ahmadi & Sriram Dasu, 2021. "Timing the Price Agreement in High‐Tech Component Procurement," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(11), pages 4105-4120, November.
    11. Friesen, Lana & MacKenzie, Ian A. & Nguyen, Mai Phuong, 2023. "Initially contestable property rights and Coase: Evidence from the lab," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).

  6. Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin & Elif Özcan-Tok, 2019. "Between anchors and aspirations: a new family of bargaining solutions," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 23(1), pages 53-73, June.

    Cited by:

    1. Carlos Alós-Ferrer & Jaume García-Segarra & Miguel Ginés-Vilar, 2018. "Anchoring on Utopia: a generalization of the Kalai–Smorodinsky solution," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 6(2), pages 141-155, October.
    2. William Thomson, 2022. "On the axiomatic theory of bargaining: a survey of recent results," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 26(4), pages 491-542, December.
    3. Tarık Kara & Emin Karagözoğlu & Elif Özcan-Tok, 2021. "Bargaining, Reference Points, and Limited Influence," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 326-362, June.
    4. Feltovich, Nick, 2019. "Is earned bargaining power more fully exploited?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 152-180.

  7. Emin Karagözoğlu & Shiran Rachmilevitch, 2018. "Implementing egalitarianism in a class of Nash demand games," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 85(3), pages 495-508, October.

    Cited by:

    1. William Thomson, 2022. "On the axiomatic theory of bargaining: a survey of recent results," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 26(4), pages 491-542, December.
    2. Rachmilevitch, Shiran, 2020. "An implementation of the Nash bargaining solution by iterated strict dominance," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    3. Shiran Rachmilevitch, 2022. "Reasonable Nash demand games," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 93(2), pages 319-330, September.
    4. Shiran Rachmilevitch, 2019. "Egalitarianism, utilitarianism, and the Nash bargaining solution," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 52(4), pages 741-751, April.
    5. Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin & Çağrı Sağlam, 2023. "(In)efficiency and equitability of equilibrium outcomes in a family of bargaining games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 52(1), pages 175-193, March.
    6. Shiran Rachmilevitch, 2020. "Rewarding moderate behavior in a dynamic Nash Demand Game," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 49(2), pages 639-650, June.

  8. Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin, 2018. "Endogenous reference points in bargaining," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 88(2), pages 283-295, October.

    Cited by:

    1. Khan, Abhimanyu, 2022. "Expected utility versus cumulative prospect theory in an evolutionary model of bargaining," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    2. William Thomson, 2022. "On the axiomatic theory of bargaining: a survey of recent results," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 26(4), pages 491-542, December.
    3. Topi Miettinen & Olli Ropponen & Pekka Sääskilahti, 2020. "Prospect Theory, Fairness, and the Escalation of Conflict at a Negotiation Impasse," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 122(4), pages 1535-1574, October.
    4. Tarık Kara & Emin Karagözoğlu & Elif Özcan-Tok, 2021. "Bargaining, Reference Points, and Limited Influence," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 326-362, June.
    5. Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin, 2015. "A Tale of Two Bargaining Solutions," Games, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-14, June.

  9. Karagözoğlu, Emin & Keskin, Kerim, 2018. "Time-varying fairness concerns, delay, and disagreement in bargaining," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 115-128.

    Cited by:

    1. Guha, Brishti, 2019. "Malice in pretrial negotiations," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 25-33.

  10. Doğan, Serhat & Karagözoğlu, Emin & Keskin, Kerim & Sağlam, Çağrı, 2018. "Multi-player race," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 123-136.

    Cited by:

    1. Deren Caglayan & Emin Karagözoglu & Kerim Keskin & Cagri Saglam, 2020. "Effort Comparisons for a Class of Four-Player Tournaments," CESifo Working Paper Series 8761, CESifo.
    2. Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin & Çağrı Sağlam, 2021. "Race meets bargaining in product development," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(3), pages 702-709, April.
    3. Peter-J. Jost, 2021. "“The ball is round, the game lasts 90 minutes, everything else is pure theoryâ€," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 22(1), pages 27-74, January.
    4. Christian Ewerhart & Julian Teichgräber, 2019. "Multi-battle contests, finite automata, and the tug-of-war," ECON - Working Papers 318, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    5. Emin Karagözoglu & Cagri Saglam & Agah R. Turan, 2020. "Tullock Brings Perseverance and Suspense to Tug-of-War," CESifo Working Paper Series 8103, CESifo.

  11. 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.

    Cited by:

    1. Astrid Kause & Oliver Vitouch & Judith Glück, 2018. "How selfish is a thirsty man? A pilot study on comparing sharing behavior with primary and secondary rewards," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(8), pages 1-11, August.
    2. Giovanni Ponti & Marcello Sartarelli & Iryna Sikora & Zhukova Vita, 2018. "Gaining Experience as Principal or Agent. An Experimental Study," Working Papers. Serie AD 2018-08, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
    3. Zhang, Yanling & Chen, Xiaojie & Liu, Aizhi & Sun, Changyin, 2018. "The effect of the stake size on the evolution of fairness," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 321(C), pages 641-653.
    4. Hopp, Daniel, 2022. "High incentives without high cost - The role of (perceived) stake sizes in dictator games," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    5. Gert Jan Hofstede & Catholijn M. Jonker & Tim Verwaart & Neil Yorke-Smith, 2019. "The Lemon Car Game Across Cultures: Evidence of Relational Rationality," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 28(5), pages 849-877, October.
    6. James C. Cox & Vjollca Sadiraj, 2018. "Incentives," Experimental Economics Center Working Paper Series 2018-01, Experimental Economics Center, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    7. Briony D. Pulford & Andrew M. Colman & Graham Loomes, 2018. "Incentive Magnitude Effects in Experimental Games: Bigger is not Necessarily Better," Games, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-10, January.
    8. Subrato Banerjee, 2020. "Effect of reduced opportunities on bargaining outcomes: an experiment with status asymmetries," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 89(3), pages 313-346, October.

  12. Zafer Akın & Emin Karagözoğlu, 2017. "The Role of Goals and Feedback in Incentivizing Performance," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(2), pages 193-211, March.
    See citations under working paper version above.
  13. Bolton, Gary E. & Karagözoğlu, Emin, 2016. "On the influence of hard leverage in a soft leverage bargaining game: The importance of credible claims," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 164-179.

    Cited by:

    1. Vittorio Pelligra & Tommaso Reggiani & Daniel John Zizzo, 2020. "Responding to (Un)Reasonable Requests by an Authority," MUNI ECON Working Papers 2020-04, Masaryk University, revised Feb 2023.
    2. Hyndman, Kyle, 2023. "Dynamic fairness in repeated bargaining with risk," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    3. Karagözoğlu, Emin & Keskin, Kerim, 2018. "Time-varying fairness concerns, delay, and disagreement in bargaining," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 115-128.
    4. Tarık Kara & Emin Karagözoğlu & Elif Özcan-Tok, 2021. "Bargaining, Reference Points, and Limited Influence," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 326-362, June.
    5. Lozano, Lina & Riedl, Arno & Rott, Christina, 2024. "The Impact of the Menstrual Cycle on Bargaining Behavior," IZA Discussion Papers 16768, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. Baranski, Andrzej & Haas, Nicholas, 2023. "The timing of communication and retaliation in bargaining: An experimental study," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    7. Feltovich, Nick, 2019. "Is earned bargaining power more fully exploited?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 152-180.
    8. Heike Hennig-Schmidt & Bernd Irlenbusch & Rainer Michael Rilke & Gari Walkowitz, 2018. "Asymmetric outside options in ultimatum bargaining: a systematic analysis," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 47(1), pages 301-329, March.
    9. Anbarci, Nejat & Feltovich, Nick, 2018. "How fully do people exploit their bargaining position? The effects of bargaining institution and the 50–50 norm," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 320-334.
    10. Hyndman, Kyle, 2021. "Dissolving partnerships under risk: An experimental investigation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 702-720.
    11. Matthew Embrey & Kyle Hyndman & Arno Riedl, 2019. "Bargaining with a Residual Claimant: An Experimental Study," Working Paper Series 0419, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
    12. Emin Karagözoğlu & Martin G. Kocher, 2019. "Bargaining under time pressure from deadlines," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(2), pages 419-440, June.
    13. Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin, 2018. "Endogenous reference points in bargaining," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 88(2), pages 283-295, October.
    14. John Duffy & Lucie Lebeau & Daniela Puzzello, 2021. "Bargaining Under Liquidity Constraints: Nash vs. Kalai in the Laboratory," Working Papers 2113, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.
    15. Federica Alberti & Sven Fischer & Werner Güth & Kei Tsutsui, 2018. "Concession Bargaining," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 62(9), pages 2017-2039, October.
    16. Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin & Elif Özcan-Tok, 2019. "Between anchors and aspirations: a new family of bargaining solutions," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 23(1), pages 53-73, June.
    17. Subrato Banerjee, 2020. "Effect of reduced opportunities on bargaining outcomes: an experiment with status asymmetries," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 89(3), pages 313-346, October.
    18. Jack Fanning & Andrew Kloosterman, 2022. "An experimental test of the Coase conjecture: Fairness in dynamic bargaining," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 53(1), pages 138-165, March.
    19. Andrew M. Davis & Kyle Hyndman, 2019. "Multidimensional Bargaining and Inventory Risk in Supply Chains: An Experimental Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(3), pages 1286-1304, March.

  14. Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin, 2015. "A Tale of Two Bargaining Solutions," Games, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-14, June.

    Cited by:

    1. William Thomson, 2022. "On the axiomatic theory of bargaining: a survey of recent results," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 26(4), pages 491-542, December.

  15. Emin Karagözoğlu & Arno Riedl, 2015. "Performance Information, Production Uncertainty, and Subjective Entitlements in Bargaining," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(11), pages 2611-2626, November.

    Cited by:

    1. Hyndman, Kyle, 2023. "Dynamic fairness in repeated bargaining with risk," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    2. Anita Gantner & Rudolf Kerschbamer, 2013. "Fairness and Efficiency in a Subjective Claims Problem," Working Papers 2013-30, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    3. Schmitz, Patrick W. & Kusterer, David J., 2018. "Government versus Private Ownership of Public Goods: Experimental Evidence," CEPR Discussion Papers 13204, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    4. Takeuchi, Ai & Veszteg, Róbert F. & Kamijo, Yoshio & Funaki, Yukihiko, 2022. "Bargaining over a jointly produced pie: The effect of the production function on bargaining outcomes," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 169-198.
    5. Luhan, Wolfgang J. & Poulsen, Anders U. & Roos, Michael W.M., 2017. "Real-time tacit bargaining, payoff focality, and coordination complexity: Experimental evidence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 687-699.
    6. Romain Espinosa & Bruno Deffains & Christian Thöni, 2020. "Debiasing preferences over redistribution: an experiment," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 55(4), pages 823-843, December.
    7. Karagözoğlu, Emin & Keskin, Kerim, 2018. "Time-varying fairness concerns, delay, and disagreement in bargaining," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 115-128.
    8. Fabio Galeotti & Maria Montero & Anders Poulsen, 2015. "Efficiency versus equality in real-time bargaining with communication," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Behavioural and Experimental Social Science (CBESS) 15-18, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    9. Bolton, Gary E. & Karagözoğlu, Emin, 2016. "On the influence of hard leverage in a soft leverage bargaining game: The importance of credible claims," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 164-179.
    10. Karagözoğlu, Emin & Kocher, Martin G., 2015. "Bargaining under Time Pressure," Discussion Papers in Economics 26642, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
    11. Wulf Gaertner & Richard Bradley & Yongsheng Xu & Lars Schwettmann, 2019. "Against the proportionality principle: Experimental findings on bargaining over losses," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(7), pages 1-18, July.
    12. Rodriguez-Lara, Ismael, 2016. "Equity and bargaining power in ultimatum games," MPRA Paper 72700, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Lozano, Lina & Riedl, Arno & Rott, Christina, 2024. "The Impact of the Menstrual Cycle on Bargaining Behavior," IZA Discussion Papers 16768, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Fabio Galeotti & Maria Montero & Anders Poulsen, 2015. "Efficiency versus Equality in Bargaining," Discussion Papers 2015-18, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    15. Feltovich, Nick, 2019. "Is earned bargaining power more fully exploited?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 152-180.
    16. Anbarci, Nejat & Feltovich, Nick, 2018. "How fully do people exploit their bargaining position? The effects of bargaining institution and the 50–50 norm," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 320-334.
    17. Anita Gantner & Regine Oexl, 2023. "Respecting entitlements in legislative bargaining: A matter of preference or necessity?," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 56(2), pages 490-519, May.
    18. Hyndman, Kyle, 2021. "Dissolving partnerships under risk: An experimental investigation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 702-720.
    19. Matthew Embrey & Kyle Hyndman & Arno Riedl, 2019. "Bargaining with a Residual Claimant: An Experimental Study," Working Paper Series 0419, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
    20. Emin Karagözoğlu & Martin G. Kocher, 2019. "Bargaining under time pressure from deadlines," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(2), pages 419-440, June.
    21. Konow, James & Saijo, Tatsuyoshi & Akai, Kenju, 2020. "Equity versus equality: Spectators, stakeholders and groups," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    22. Colin F. Camerer & Gideon Nave & Alec Smith, 2019. "Dynamic Unstructured Bargaining with Private Information: Theory, Experiment, and Outcome Prediction via Machine Learning," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(4), pages 1867-1890, April.
    23. Cavalan, Quentin & de Gardelle, Vincent & Vergnaud, Jean-Christophe, 2022. "I did most of the work! Three sources of bias in bargaining with joint production," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    24. Regine Oexl & Anita Gantner, 2021. "Respecting Entitlements in Legislative Bargaining - A Matter of Preference or Necessity?," Working Papers 2021-25, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.

  16. Emin Karagözoğlu, 2014. "A noncooperative approach to bankruptcy problems with an endogenous estate," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 217(1), pages 299-318, June.
    See citations under working paper version above.
  17. Esat Cetemen & Emin Karagözoğlu, 2014. "Implementing equal division with an ultimatum threat," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 77(2), pages 223-236, August.

    Cited by:

    1. Shiran Rachmilevitch, "undated". "Punishing greediness in Divide-the-dollar games," Working Papers WP2016/4, University of Haifa, Department of Economics.
    2. Emin Karagözoğlu & Martin G. Kocher, 2019. "Bargaining under time pressure from deadlines," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(2), pages 419-440, June.
    3. Emin Karagözoğlu & Shiran Rachmilevitch, 2018. "Implementing egalitarianism in a class of Nash demand games," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 85(3), pages 495-508, October.
    4. Shiran Rachmilevitch, 2022. "Reasonable Nash demand games," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 93(2), pages 319-330, September.
    5. Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin & Çağrı Sağlam, 2023. "(In)efficiency and equitability of equilibrium outcomes in a family of bargaining games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 52(1), pages 175-193, March.
    6. Shiran Rachmilevitch, 2020. "Rewarding moderate behavior in a dynamic Nash Demand Game," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 49(2), pages 639-650, June.

  18. Karagözoğlu, Emin & Keskin, Kerim & Sağlam, Çağrı, 2013. "A minimally altruistic refinement of Nash equilibrium," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 66(3), pages 422-430.

    Cited by:

    1. Takashi Kamihigashi & Kerim Keskin & Çağrı Sağlam, 2021. "Organizational refinements of Nash equilibrium," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 91(3), pages 289-312, October.
    2. Crettez, Bertrand & Nessah, Rabia, 2020. "On the existence of unilateral support equilibrium," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 41-47.

  19. Ashlagi, Itai & Karagözoğlu, Emin & Klaus, Bettina, 2012. "A non-cooperative support for equal division in estate division problems," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 63(3), pages 228-233.
    See citations under working paper version above.
  20. János Flesch & Emin Karagözoǧlu & Andrés Perea, 2009. "Optimal search for a moving target with the option to wait," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 56(6), pages 526-539, September.
    See citations under working paper version above.

Chapters

    Sorry, no citations of chapters recorded.

Books

    Sorry, no citations of books recorded.

More information

Research fields, statistics, top rankings, if available.

Statistics

Access and download statistics for all items

Co-authorship network on CollEc

Featured entries

This author is featured on the following reading lists, publication compilations, Wikipedia, or ReplicationWiki entries:
  1. Turkish Economists

NEP Fields

NEP is an announcement service for new working papers, with a weekly report in each of many fields. This author has had 13 papers announced in NEP. These are the fields, ordered by number of announcements, along with their dates. If the author is listed in the directory of specialists for this field, a link is also provided.
  1. NEP-GTH: Game Theory (9) 2008-02-02 2008-09-29 2008-12-01 2010-06-11 2010-07-31 2016-04-04 2020-03-09 2020-03-16 2020-03-16. Author is listed
  2. NEP-EXP: Experimental Economics (4) 2010-07-31 2010-09-11 2015-08-25 2016-04-04
  3. NEP-MIC: Microeconomics (3) 2008-12-01 2020-03-09 2020-03-16
  4. NEP-ORE: Operations Research (3) 2020-03-09 2020-03-16 2021-01-18
  5. NEP-HRM: Human Capital and Human Resource Management (2) 2015-08-25 2020-03-09
  6. NEP-NEU: Neuroeconomics (2) 2010-03-20 2015-08-25
  7. NEP-SPO: Sports and Economics (2) 2020-03-09 2021-01-18
  8. NEP-AGE: Economics of Ageing (1) 2010-09-11
  9. NEP-BEC: Business Economics (1) 2015-08-25
  10. NEP-CBE: Cognitive and Behavioural Economics (1) 2016-04-04
  11. NEP-CTA: Contract Theory and Applications (1) 2020-03-16
  12. NEP-EVO: Evolutionary Economics (1) 2010-09-11
  13. NEP-HPE: History and Philosophy of Economics (1) 2010-09-11
  14. NEP-POL: Positive Political Economics (1) 2010-09-11

Corrections

All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. For general information on how to correct material on RePEc, see these instructions.

To update listings or check citations waiting for approval, Emin Karagozoglu
(Emin Karagozoglu) should log into the RePEc Author Service.

To make corrections to the bibliographic information of a particular item, find the technical contact on the abstract page of that item. There, details are also given on how to add or correct references and citations.

To link different versions of the same work, where versions have a different title, use this form. Note that if the versions have a very similar title and are in the author's profile, the links will usually be created automatically.

Please note that most corrections can 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.