IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Identifier les «préférences sociales»: une étude expérimentale en jeu d’ultimatum


  • Ingrid Bierla

    (IESEG School of Management)

  • Sebastien Richard

    () (Faculté des Sciences Economiques et Sociales, Lille 1)


Partant du constat que des préférences sociales très différentes peuvent conduire, assez paradoxalement, à des comportements assez similaires en jeu d’ultimatum, ce papier a pour ambition de proposer une méthode d’identification de ces préférences. Nous proposons une modélisation théorique en incertitude du comportement de trois types de joueurs : les égoïstes, les compétiteurs et les averses à l’inégalité et testons, lors d’une session expérimentale, son pouvoir prédictif des préférences sociales. Nous montrons alors que celles-ci peuvent être identifiées avec précision : lors d’un questionnaire post-expérimental, plus de 80% des joueurs valident notre prédiction sur leur préférence.

Suggested Citation

  • Ingrid Bierla & Sebastien Richard, 2005. "Identifier les «préférences sociales»: une étude expérimentale en jeu d’ultimatum," Working Papers 2005-ECO-03, IESEG School of Management.
  • Handle: RePEc:ies:wpaper:e200503

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    File Function: First version, 2005
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Martin Petrick, 2005. "Empirical measurement of credit rationing in agriculture: a methodological survey," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 33(2), pages 191-203, September.
    2. Oriade, Caleb A. & Dillon, Carl R., 1997. "Developments in biophysical and bioeconomic simulation of agricultural systems: a review," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 17(1), pages 45-58, October.
    3. Chatelain, Jean-Bernard, 2000. "Explicit Lagrange multiplier for firms facing a debt ceiling constraint1," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 153-158, May.
    4. Schiantarelli, Fabio, 1996. "Financial Constraints and Investment: Methodological Issues and International Evidence," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 12(2), pages 70-89, Summer.
    5. Schaffer, Mark E., 1998. "Do Firms in Transition Economies Have Soft Budget Constraints? A Reconsideration of Concepts and Evidence," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 80-103, March.
    6. Kornai, J, 1979. "Resource-Constrained versus Demand-Constrained Systems," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(4), pages 801-819, July.
    7. Barry, Peter J. & Robison, Lindon J., 2001. "Agricultural finance: Credit, credit constraints, and consequences," Handbook of Agricultural Economics,in: B. L. Gardner & G. C. Rausser (ed.), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 10, pages 513-571 Elsevier.
    8. Loren Tauer & Zdenko Stefanides, 1998. "Success in maximizing profits and reasons for profit deviation on dairy farms," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(2), pages 151-156, February.
    9. Fuss, Melvyn & McFadden, Daniel & Mundlak, Yair, 1978. "A Survey of Functional Forms in the Economic Analysis of Production," Histoy of Economic Thought Chapters,in: Fuss, Melvyn & McFadden, Daniel (ed.), Production Economics: A Dual Approach to Theory and Applications, volume 1, chapter 4 McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought.
    10. Ball, V. Eldon & Bureau, Jean-Christophe & Eakin, Kelly & Somwaru, Agapi, 1997. "Cap reform: modelling supply response subject to the land set-aside," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 17(2-3), pages 277-288, December.
    11. Sckokai, Paolo & Moro, Daniele, 2002. "Modelling The Cap Arable Crop Regime Under Uncertainty," 2002 Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA 19860, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    12. Catherine Benjamin & Euan Phimister, 2002. "Does Capital Market Structure Affect Farm Investment? A Comparison using French and British Farm-Level Panel Data," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 84(4), pages 1115-1129.
    13. Cornes,Richard, 1992. "Duality and Modern Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521336017, March.
    14. Jean-Bernard Chatelain, 2000. "Explicit Lagrange Multiplier for Firms Facing a Debt Ceiling Constraint," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00119408, HAL.
    15. Chavas, Jean-Paul, 2001. "Structural change in agricultural production: Economics, technology and policy," Handbook of Agricultural Economics,in: B. L. Gardner & G. C. Rausser (ed.), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 5, pages 263-285 Elsevier.
    16. Tulkens, Henry & Vanden Eeckaut, Philippe, 1995. "Non-parametric efficiency, progress and regress measures for panel data: Methodological aspects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 80(3), pages 474-499, February.
    17. Robert G. Chambers, 2002. "Exact nonradial input, output, and productivity measurement," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 20(4), pages 751-765.
    18. David de Meza & David C. Webb, 1987. "Too Much Investment: A Problem of Asymmetric Information," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 102(2), pages 281-292.
    19. Tauer, Loren W. & Kaiser, Harry M., 1988. "Negative Milk Supply Response Under Constrained Profit Maximizing Behavior," Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 17(2), October.
    20. Bernhard Brümmer & Jens-Peter Loy, 2000. "The Technical Efficiency Impact of Farm Credit Programmes: A Case Study of Northern Germany," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(3), pages 405-418.
    21. Battese, George E., 1992. "Frontier production functions and technical efficiency: a survey of empirical applications in agricultural economics," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 7(3-4), pages 185-208, October.
    22. Ralph Bierlen & Allen M. Featherstone, 1998. "Fundamental q, Cash Flow, and Investment: Evidence from Farm Panel Data," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(3), pages 427-435, August.
    23. Chavas, Jean-Paul & Aliber, Michael, 1993. "An Analysis Of Economic Efficiency In Agriculture: A Nonparametric Approach," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 18(01), July.
    24. repec:hal:journl:halshs-00119408 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    Jeu d’ultimatum; préférences sociales;

    JEL classification:

    • C78 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Bargaining Theory; Matching Theory
    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D01 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Microeconomic Behavior: Underlying Principles


    Access and download statistics


    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:ies:wpaper:e200503. 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: (Monika Marin). General contact details of provider: .

    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.