IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sce/scecf1/91.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Evolutionary Learning in the Ultimatum Game

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Riechmann

Abstract

The ultimatum game is (in)famous for its `anomalies': The outcomes of laboratory experiments are very different from the results generated by traditional game theory. This paper aims to find to what extent these discrepancies between theory and experiments can be explained by the effects of bounded rationality and learning dynamics. These are modeled by several agent based models and computer simulations of evolutionary learning by pure imitation as well as imitation and experiments. The main result of the analysis is surprisingly clear and robust: Proposers do not play a subgame perfect strategy but instead `learn' to make offers of about 20 to 25 % of the total amount to their opponents.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Riechmann, 2001. "Evolutionary Learning in the Ultimatum Game," Computing in Economics and Finance 2001 91, Society for Computational Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:sce:scecf1:91
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Riechmann, Thomas, 2001. "Two Notes on Replication in Evolutionary Modelling," Hannover Economic Papers (HEP) dp-239, Leibniz Universit├Ąt Hannover, Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakult├Ąt.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ultimatum game; evolutionary dynamics; evolutionary algorithms;

    JEL classification:

    • C63 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Computational Techniques
    • C78 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Bargaining Theory; Matching Theory
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness

    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:sce:scecf1:91. 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: (Christopher F. Baum). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/sceeeea.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.