IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/uea/wcbess/16-07.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

That's the ticket: Explicit lottery randomisation and learning in Tullock contests

Author

Listed:
  • Subhasish M. Chowdhury

    (University of East Anglia)

  • Anwesha Mukherjee

    (University of East Anglia)

  • Theodore L. Turocy

    (University of East Anglia)

Abstract

We experimentally contrast mathematical versus operational explanations of Tullock lottery contests. We contrast a protocol explaining the contest in terms of probability of winning, with an operational approach that carries out the random component of the contest as an explicit lottery each period. Initial expenditure levels are significantly lower when using the operational approach. In addition, using the operational approach, groups far from equilibrium in a given period move more rapidly towards approximate mutual best response. We find these results in sessions conducted in the UK and in the US. The implications that can be drawn from experiments on contest games therefore depend on the approach used to present the game to the players.

Suggested Citation

  • Subhasish M. Chowdhury & Anwesha Mukherjee & Theodore L. Turocy, 2016. "That's the ticket: Explicit lottery randomisation and learning in Tullock contests," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Behavioural and Experimental Social Science (CBESS) 16-07, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
  • Handle: RePEc:uea:wcbess:16-07
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.uea.ac.uk/documents/166500/0/CBESS+16-07.pdf/f7768de4-097f-4575-b0c3-b3faf947616e
    File Function: main text
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Curtis R. Price & Roman M. Sheremeta, 2015. "Endowment Origin, Demographic Effects, and Individual Preferences in Contests," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(3), pages 597-619, September.
    2. Kimbrough, Erik O. & Sheremeta, Roman M., 2013. "Side-payments and the costs of conflict," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 278-286.
    3. Klaus Abbink & Jordi Brandts & Benedikt Herrmann & Henrik Orzen, 2010. "Intergroup Conflict and Intra-group Punishment in an Experimental Contest Game," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 420-447, March.
    4. Pamela Schmitt & Robert Shupp & Kurtis Swope & John Cadigan, 2004. "Multi-period rent-seeking contests with carryover: Theory and experimental evidence," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 5(3), pages 187-211, November.
    5. Philip Brookins & Dmitry Ryvkin, 2014. "An experimental study of bidding in contests of incomplete information," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 17(2), pages 245-261, June.
    6. Ke, Changxia & Konrad, Kai A. & Morath, Florian, 2013. "Brothers in arms – An experiment on the alliance puzzle," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 61-76.
    7. Fallucchi, Francesco & Renner, Elke & Sefton, Martin, 2013. "Information feedback and contest structure in rent-seeking games," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 223-240.
    8. Shupp, Robert & Sheremeta, Roman M. & Schmidt, David & Walker, James, 2013. "Resource allocation contests: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 257-267.
    9. Chowdhury, Subhasish M. & Sheremeta, Roman M. & Turocy, Theodore L., 2014. "Overbidding and overspreading in rent-seeking experiments: Cost structure and prize allocation rules," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 224-238.
    10. Kimbrough, Erik O. & Sheremeta, Roman M. & Shields, Timothy W., 2014. "When parity promotes peace: Resolving conflict between asymmetric agents," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 96-108.
    11. Sheremeta, Roman M., 2010. "Experimental comparison of multi-stage and one-stage contests," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 68(2), pages 731-747, March.
    12. John Morgan & Henrik Orzen & Martin Sefton, 2012. "Endogenous entry in contests," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 51(2), pages 435-463, October.
    13. Faravelli, Marco & Stanca, Luca, 2012. "When less is more: Rationing and rent dissipation in stochastic contests," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 170-183.
    14. Mago, Shakun D. & Sheremeta, Roman M. & Yates, Andrew, 2013. "Best-of-three contest experiments: Strategic versus psychological momentum," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 287-296.
    15. Chowdhury, Subhasish M. & Sheremeta, Roman M., 2011. "Multiple equilibria in Tullock contests," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 112(2), pages 216-219, August.
    16. Roman Sheremeta & Jingjing Zhang, 2010. "Can groups solve the problem of over-bidding in contests?," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 35(2), pages 175-197, July.
    17. Fonseca, Miguel A., 2009. "An experimental investigation of asymmetric contests," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 582-591, September.
    18. Sara Godoy & Miguel Meléndez-Jiménez & Antonio Morales, 2015. "No fight, no loss: underinvestment in experimental contest games," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 53-72, February.
    19. Ahn, T.K. & Isaac, R. Mark & Salmon, Timothy C., 2011. "Rent seeking in groups," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 116-125, January.
    20. Roman M. Sheremeta, 2011. "Contest Design: An Experimental Investigation," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 49(2), pages 573-590, April.
    21. Douglas Davis & Robert Reilly, 1998. "Do too many cooks always spoil the stew? An experimental analysis of rent-seeking and the role of a strategic buyer," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 95(1), pages 89-115, April.
    22. Millner, Edward L & Pratt, Michael D, 1991. "Risk Aversion and Rent-Seeking: An Extension and Some Experimental Evidence," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 69(1), pages 81-92, February.
    23. Radner, Roy, 1980. "Collusive behavior in noncooperative epsilon-equilibria of oligopolies with long but finite lives," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 136-154, April.
    24. Price, Curtis R. & Sheremeta, Roman M., 2011. "Endowment effects in contests," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 111(3), pages 217-219, June.
    25. Jakob Kapeller & Stefan Steinerberger, 2013. "How formalism shapes perception: an experiment on mathematics as a language," International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 4(2), pages 138-156.
    26. Roman M. Sheremeta, 2013. "Overbidding And Heterogeneous Behavior In Contest Experiments," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 491-514, July.
    27. Lim, Wooyoung & Matros, Alexander & Turocy, Theodore L., 2014. "Bounded rationality and group size in Tullock contests: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 155-167.
    28. Masiliunas, Aidas & Mengel, Friederike & Reiss, J. Philipp, 2014. "Behavioral variation in Tullock contests," Working Paper Series in Economics 55, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Department of Economics and Business Engineering.
    29. Shogren, Jason F & Baik, Kyung H, 1991. "Reexamining Efficient Rent-Seeking in Laboratory Markets," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 69(1), pages 69-79, February.
    30. Cary Deck & Salar Jahedi, 2015. "Time Discounting in Strategic Contests," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(1), pages 151-164, March.
    31. Edward Millner & Michael Pratt, 1989. "An experimental investigation of efficient rent-seeking," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 62(2), pages 139-151, August.
    32. Urs Fischbacher, 2007. "z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(2), pages 171-178, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    lottery contest; learning; framing; experiment;

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness

    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:uea:wcbess:16-07. 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: (Theodore Turocy). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/esueauk.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.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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.