IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mcm/deptwp/2009-04.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Quantity Precommitment with Price Competition versus Quantity Precommitment with Market Clearing Prices in the Laboratory

Author

Listed:
  • David Goodwin
  • Stuart Mestelman

Abstract

The paper reports the results of 39 laboratory duopoly markets for which pricing institution and participant experience are treatments. Cournot (C) duopolies (quantity precommitment and a price determined to clear the market) are contrasted with Kreps-Scheinkman (KS) duopolies (quantity precommitment and posted prices). Inexperienced participants in KS markets have much more difficulty selecting capacities consistent with the theoretical predictions than do those in C markets. With experience, the differences disappear.

Suggested Citation

  • David Goodwin & Stuart Mestelman, 2009. "Quantity Precommitment with Price Competition versus Quantity Precommitment with Market Clearing Prices in the Laboratory," Department of Economics Working Papers 2009-04, McMaster University.
  • Handle: RePEc:mcm:deptwp:2009-04
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://socserv.mcmaster.ca/econ/rsrch/papers/archive/2009-04.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yilmaz, Cengiz & Kabadayi, Ebru Tumer, 2006. "The role of monitoring in interfirm exchange: Effects on partner unilateral cooperation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 59(12), pages 1231-1238, November.
    2. Kreps, David M. & Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John & Wilson, Robert, 1982. "Rational cooperation in the finitely repeated prisoners' dilemma," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 245-252, August.
    3. James C. Cox & Cary A. Deck, 2006. "When Are Women More Generous than Men?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 44(4), pages 587-598, October.
    4. Anderhub, Vital & Engelmann, Dirk & Guth, Werner, 2002. "An experimental study of the repeated trust game with incomplete information," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 197-216, June.
    5. Cripps, Martin W. & Mailath, George J. & Samuelson, Larry, 2007. "Disappearing private reputations in long-run relationships," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 134(1), pages 287-316, May.
    6. Brandts, Jordi & Figueras, Neus, 2003. "An exploration of reputation formation in experimental games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, pages 89-115.
    7. Drew Fudenberg & David K. Levine, 2008. "Maintaining a Reputation when Strategies are Imperfectly Observed," World Scientific Book Chapters,in: A Long-Run Collaboration On Long-Run Games, chapter 8, pages 143-161 World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    8. Church, Bryan & Gaa, James C. & Khalid Nainar, S. M. & Shehata, Mohamed M., 2005. "Experimental Evidence Relating to the Person-Situation Interactionist Model of Ethical Decision Making," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(03), pages 363-383, July.
    9. Fudenberg, Drew & Maskin, Eric, 1986. "The Folk Theorem in Repeated Games with Discounting or with Incomplete Information," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 54(3), pages 533-554, May.
    10. Giorgio Coricelli & Luis González Morales & Amelie Mahlstedt, 2006. "The Investment Game With Asymmetric Information," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, pages 13-30.
    11. Bohnet, Iris & Huck, Steffen, 2003. "Repetition and Reputation: Implications for Trust and Trustworthiness in the Short and in the Long Run," Working Paper Series rwp03-048, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    12. James C. Cox & Cary A. Deck, 2006. "Assigning Intentions when Actions Are Unobservable: The Impact of Trembling in the Trust Game," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 73(2), pages 307-314, October.
    13. Nancy Buchan & Rachel Croson, 1999. "Gender and Culture: International Experimental Evidence from Trust Games," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(2), pages 386-391, May.
    14. James Cox & Klarita Sadiraj & Vjollca Sadiraj, 2008. "Implications of trust, fear, and reciprocity for modeling economic behavior," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, pages 1-24.
    15. Johnson, Devon & Grayson, Kent, 2005. "Cognitive and affective trust in service relationships," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 58(4), pages 500-507, April.
    16. Rohm, Andrew J. & Milne, George R., 2004. "Just what the doctor ordered: The role of information sensitivity and trust in reducing medical information privacy concern," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 57(9), pages 1000-1011, September.
    17. Berg Joyce & Dickhaut John & McCabe Kevin, 1995. "Trust, Reciprocity, and Social History," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 122-142, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Duopoly; Laboratory experiment; Quantity precommitment; Posted prices; Price competition; Market-clearing prices; Experience;

    JEL classification:

    • C92 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Group Behavior
    • D43 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:mcm:deptwp:2009-04. 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: () or (Rebekah McClure). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/demcmca.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.