IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Bargaining, Interdependence and the Rationality of Fair Division

Author Info

  • Giuseppe Lopomo
  • Efe A Ok

Abstract

We consider two-person bargaining games with interdependent preferences and bilateral incomplete information. We show that in both the ultimatum game and the two-stage alternating-offers game, our equilibrium predictions are consistent with a number of robust experimental regularities that falsify the standard game theoretic model: occurrence of disagreements, disadvantageous counteroffers, and outcomes that come close to the equal split of the pie. In the context of infinite-horizon bargaining, the implications of the model pertaining to fair outcomes is even stronger. In particular, the Coase property in our case generates "almost" 50-50 splits of the pie, almost immediately. The present approach thus provides a positive theory for the frequently encountered phenomenon of the 50-50 division of the gains from trade. Copyright 2001 by the RAND Corporation.

(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Download Info

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.

File URL: http://www.dklevine.com/archive/bargaini.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by David K. Levine in its series Levine's Working Paper Archive with number 563824000000000114.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 20 May 2001
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:cla:levarc:563824000000000114
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.dklevine.com/

Keywords:

Other versions of this item:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References listed on IDEAS
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.:

as in new window
  1. Georg Kirchsteiger, 1994. "The role of envy in ultimatum games," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/5925, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  2. Gary E Bolton & Rami Zuwick, 2010. "Anonymity versus punishments in ultimatum bargaining," Levine's Working Paper Archive 826, David K. Levine.
  3. James Andreoni & John H Miller, 1997. "Giving according to GARP: an experimental study of rationality and altruism," Levine's Working Paper Archive 672, David K. Levine.
  4. Kockesen, Levent & Ok, Efe A., 1997. "Negatively Interdependent Preferences," Working Papers 97-02, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
  5. Clark, Andrew E. & Oswald, Andrew J., 1996. "Satisfaction and comparison income," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(3), pages 359-381, September.
  6. Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, . "A Theory of Fairness, Competition and Cooperation," IEW - Working Papers 004, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
  7. In-Koo Cho & David M. Kreps, 1997. "Signaling Games and Stable Equilibria," Levine's Working Paper Archive 896, David K. Levine.
  8. David K. Levine, 1998. "Modeling Altruism and Spitefulness in Experiment," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 1(3), pages 593-622, July.
  9. Colin F. Camerer & Richard H. Thaler, 1995. "Anomalies: Ultimatums, Dictators and Manners," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 209-219, Spring.
  10. Kennan, John & Wilson, Robert, 1993. "Bargaining with Private Information," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 31(1), pages 45-104, March.
  11. J. Ochs & Alvin E. Roth, 1998. "An experimental study of sequential bargaining," Levine's Working Paper Archive 331, David K. Levine.
  12. Drew Fudenberg & David K. Levine & Jean Tirole, 1985. "Infinite-Horizon Models of Bargaining with One-Sided Incomplete Information," Levine's Working Paper Archive 1098, David K. Levine.
  13. Matthew Rabin, 1998. "Psychology and Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(1), pages 11-46, March.
  14. Daughety, A.F., 1993. "Socially-Influenced Choice : Equity Considerations in Models of Consumer Choice and Games," Working Papers 93-01, University of Iowa, Department of Economics.
  15. Herrero, Maria Jose, 1989. "The nash program: Non-convex bargaining problems," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 266-277, December.
  16. Ariel Rubinstein, 2010. "Perfect Equilibrium in a Bargaining Model," Levine's Working Paper Archive 252, David K. Levine.
  17. Bolton, Gary E., 1997. "The rationality of splitting equally," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 365-381, March.
  18. Ellingsen, Tore, 1995. "The Evolution of Bargaining Behavior," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance 61, Stockholm School of Economics.
  19. Cho, I-K., 1988. "Uncertainty And Delay In Bargaining," Papers 88-63, Chicago - Graduate School of Business.
  20. Drew Fudenberg & Jean Tirole, 1991. "Game Theory," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262061414, December.
  21. Gul, Faruk & Sonnenschein, Hugo & Wilson, Robert, 1986. "Foundations of dynamic monopoly and the coase conjecture," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 155-190, June.
  22. Bolton, Gary E, 1991. "A Comparative Model of Bargaining: Theory and Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(5), pages 1096-136, December.
  23. Forsythe Robert & Horowitz Joel L. & Savin N. E. & Sefton Martin, 1994. "Fairness in Simple Bargaining Experiments," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 347-369, May.
  24. Gul, Faruk & Sonnenschein, Hugo, 1988. "On Delay in Bargaining with One-Sided Uncertainty," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 56(3), pages 601-11, May.
  25. Young H. P., 1993. "An Evolutionary Model of Bargaining," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 145-168, February.
  26. Guth, Werner & Schmittberger, Rolf & Schwarze, Bernd, 1982. "An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 367-388, December.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

as in new window


Cited by:

  1. Mark A. Jamison, 2004. "Effects of Industry Concentration on Quality Choices for Network Connectivity," Working Papers 04-08, NET Institute.
  2. Rasch, Alexander & Wambach, Achim & Wiener, Kristina, 2012. "Bargaining and inequity aversion: On the efficiency of the double auction," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 114(2), pages 178-181.
  3. Shyh-fang Ueng, 2005. "A theory of efficient coexistence," International Economic Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(3), pages 397-416.
  4. Sigbjørn Birkeland & Bertil Tungodden, 2014. "Fairness motivation in bargaining: a matter of principle," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 77(1), pages 125-151, June.
  5. Barry Feldman, 2005. "Lost in Translation? Basis Utility and Proportionality in Games," Game Theory and Information 0507001, EconWPA, revised 06 Jul 2005.
  6. Cox, Caleb A., 2013. "Inequity aversion and advantage seeking with asymmetric competition," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 121-136.
  7. Hasan, Hamid & Ejaz, Nauman, 2013. "Testing for Differences across Genders: A Replication of Ultimatum Game at International Islamic University, Islamabad," MPRA Paper 44923, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  8. Shreekant Gupta, 2010. "Incentive Based Approaches for Mitigating Greenhouse Gas Emmissions : Issues And Prospects for India," Working Papers id:2638, eSocialSciences.
  9. Carmen Marchiori, 2010. "Concern for Fairness and Incentives in Water Negotiations," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 45(4), pages 553-571, April.
  10. Shreekant Gupta, 2000. "Incentive-Based Approaches for Mitigating Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Issues and Prospects for India," Working papers 85, Centre for Development Economics, Delhi School of Economics.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Access and download statistics

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cla:levarc:563824000000000114. 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: (David K. Levine)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.