IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/chu/wpaper/23-11.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Suggested versus Extended Gifts: How Alternative Market Institutions Mitigate Moral Hazard

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel Houser

    (George Mason University)

  • Jason Shachat

    (Chapman University, Durham University)

  • Weiwei Zheng

    (European University Institute)

Abstract

Gift exchange can partially mitigate supply-side moral hazard, even in anonymous market interactions. In a market where quality is not fully contractable, the amount that a price exceeds the market-clearing price for the lowest quality is a gift from the buyer. We show that the gift formation process, inextricably linked with a market institution’s price formation process, greatly infuences the size and efectiveness of the gift. When the market institution dictates that prices are formed by bids posted by buyers, the gift is extended to the seller. When the market institution dictates that prices are formed by ofers posted by sellers, the gift is suggested by the seller. We conjecture that extended gifts do not instill as strong a concern for the material welfare of the other party as suggested gifts. We show in experiments that this efect is quite profound in both monopsonist and thick markets. Posted ofer markets generate higher prices, in turn larger gifts, and higher levels of product quality than posted bid ones. In addition, the posted ofer institution generates a higher quality given the price, rather than simply generating higher prices. Both sides of the market obtain higher payofs under posted ofer institutions.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel Houser & Jason Shachat & Weiwei Zheng, 2023. "Suggested versus Extended Gifts: How Alternative Market Institutions Mitigate Moral Hazard," Working Papers 23-11, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.
  • Handle: RePEc:chu:wpaper:23-11
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://digitalcommons.chapman.edu/esi_working_papers/391/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    market institution; moral hazard; gift-exchange game; other-regarding preference;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C90 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - General
    • D47 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Market Design
    • L14 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Transactional Relationships; Contracts and Reputation

    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:chu:wpaper:23-11. 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: Megan Luetje (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/esichus.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.