IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hcx/wpaper/9401.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Test for Comparative Income Effects in an Ultimatum Bargaining Experiment

Author

Listed:
  • John Carter

    () (Department of Economics, College of the Holy Cross)

  • Shannon A. McAloon

    (Department of Economics, College of the Holy Cross)

Abstract

We test Bolton's (1991) comparative bargaining model by conducting an ultimatum experiment with two primary treatments distinguished only by their payoff rules. In the first treatment subjects play a series of basic ultimatum games. Because responders can increase comparative income by rejecting offers deemed too low, outcomes are expected to diverge from extreme divisions in the direction of equality. In the second treatment subjects play a series of ultimatum tournaments. Because rejection of low offers can only decrease comparative income, extreme splits are expected. Hence, the comparative model predicts that offers will be lower and near zero in the second treatment. The results of our experiment do not support the comparative model. Mean offers in the ultimatum touraments are not extreme, nor are they significantly lower than those in the basic ultimatum games.

Suggested Citation

  • John Carter & Shannon A. McAloon, 1994. "A Test for Comparative Income Effects in an Ultimatum Bargaining Experiment," Working Papers 9401, College of the Holy Cross, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:hcx:wpaper:9401
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0167-2681(96)00880-3
    File Function: Publication-Status: Published in Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, Vol. 31:3, December 1996, pp. 369-380.
    Download Restriction: no

    More about this item

    Keywords

    bargaining; ultimatum game;

    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:hcx:wpaper:9401. 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: (Victor Matheson). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/deholus.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.