IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/qmsrps/202601.html

An experimental study of a continuous Japanese-English auction for the wallet game

Author

Listed:
  • Georgalos, Konstantinos
  • Gonçalves, Ricardo
  • Ray, Indrajit
  • SenGupta, Sonali

Abstract

This paper reports results from a laboratory experiment on a continuous Japanese-English auction in a common-value 'wallet game'. The main objective is to test whether bidders follow the equilibrium bidding strategy predicted by theory. We find systematic deviations from equilibrium behaviour: instead of bidding according to the Nash equilibrium, subjects appear to rely on expected value (EV) bidding. As a consequence, observed auction prices are higher than the theoretical benchmark, and the winner's curse occurs in a substantial fraction of auctions. We analyse bidding behaviour in detail and discuss the implications of our findings.

Suggested Citation

  • Georgalos, Konstantinos & Gonçalves, Ricardo & Ray, Indrajit & SenGupta, Sonali, 2026. "An experimental study of a continuous Japanese-English auction for the wallet game," QBS Working Paper Series 2026/01, Queen's University Belfast, Queen's Business School.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:qmsrps:202601
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/334461/1/wps-202601.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brocas, Isabelle & Carrillo, Juan D. & Castro, Manuel, 2017. "Second-price common value auctions with uncertainty, private and public information: Experimental evidence," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 28-40.
    2. James Cox & Sam Dinkin & James Swarthout, 2001. "Endogenous Entry and Exit in Common Value Auctions," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 4(2), pages 163-181, October.
    3. Charness, Gary & Levin, Dan & Schmeidler, David, 2019. "An experimental study of estimation and bidding in common-value auctions with public information," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 73-98.
    4. Cox, James C. & Smith, Vernon L. & Walker, James M., 1983. "A test that discriminates between two models of the Dutch-first auction non-isomorphism," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 4(2-3), pages 205-219.
    5. Ricardo Gonçalves & Indrajit Ray, 2024. "Revenue implications of choosing discrete bid levels in a Japanese–English auction," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 28(1), pages 125-150, February.
    6. Gonçalves, Ricardo & Ray, Indrajit, 2017. "A note on the wallet game with discrete bid levels," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 177-179.
    7. Milgrom, Paul R & Weber, Robert J, 1982. "A Theory of Auctions and Competitive Bidding," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(5), pages 1089-1122, September.
    8. Ricardo Gonçalves & John Hey, 2018. "Experimental Evidence On English Auctions: Oral Outcry Versus Clock," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Experiments in Economics Decision Making and Markets, chapter 20, pages 427-466, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    9. James C. Cox & Duncan James, 2012. "Clocks and Trees: Isomorphic Dutch Auctions and Centipede Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 80(2), pages 883-903, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Goeree, Jacob K. & Offerman, Theo, 2003. "Winner's curse without overbidding," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(4), pages 625-644, August.
    2. Ricardo Gonçalves & Indrajit Ray, 2024. "Revenue implications of choosing discrete bid levels in a Japanese–English auction," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 28(1), pages 125-150, February.
    3. Ronald M. Harstad, 2007. "Does a Seller Really Want Another Bidder?," Working Papers 0711, Department of Economics, University of Missouri.
    4. Axel Ockenfels & David Reiley & Abdolkarim Sadrieh, 2006. "Online Auctions," NBER Working Papers 12785, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Ingebretsen Carlson, Jim & Wu, Tingting, 2022. "Shill bidding and information in eBay auctions: A Laboratory study," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 341-360.
    6. Söllner, Matthias, 2008. "Menschliches Verhalten in elektronischen Märkten," Bayreuth Reports on Information Systems Management 34, University of Bayreuth, Chair of Information Systems Management.
    7. Patrick Bajari & Ali Hortacsu, 2005. "Are Structural Estimates of Auction Models Reasonable? Evidence from Experimental Data," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 113(4), pages 703-741, August.
    8. Theo Offerman & Giorgia Romagnoli & Andreas Ziegler, 2022. "Why are open ascending auctions popular? The role of information aggregation and behavioral biases," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 13(2), pages 787-823, May.
    9. Goeree, Jacob K. & Offerman, Theo & Schram, Arthur, 2006. "Using first-price auctions to sell heterogeneous licenses," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 555-581, May.
    10. Theo Offerman, 2002. "Efficiency in Auctions with Private and Common Values: An Experimental Study," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(3), pages 625-643, June.
    11. Gon alves, Ricardo & Ray, Indrajit, 2016. "Equilibria in a Japanese-English Auction with Discrete Bid Levels for the Wallet Game," Cardiff Economics Working Papers E2016/13, Cardiff University, Cardiff Business School, Economics Section.
    12. Ernan Haruvy & Peter Popkowski Leszczyc & Octavian Carare & James Cox & Eric Greenleaf & Wolfgang Jank & Sandy Jap & Young-Hoon Park & Michael Rothkopf, 2008. "Competition between auctions," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 431-448, December.
    13. Sascha Füllbrunn, 2009. "A comparison of Candle Auctions and Hard Close Auctions with Common Values," FEMM Working Papers 09019, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management.
    14. Grosskopf, Brit & Rentschler, Lucas & Sarin, Rajiv, 2018. "An experiment on first-price common-value auctions with asymmetric information structures: The blessed winner," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 40-64.
    15. Gonçalves, Ricardo & Ray, Indrajit, 2017. "A note on the wallet game with discrete bid levels," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 177-179.
    16. Marco Casari & John C. Ham & John H. Kagel, 2007. "Selection Bias, Demographic Effects, and Ability Effects in Common Value Auction Experiments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(4), pages 1278-1304, September.
    17. Gonçalves, Ricardo & Ray, Indrajit, 2017. "Partition Equilibria in a Japanese-English Auction with Discrete Bid Levels for the Wallet Game," CRETA Online Discussion Paper Series 34, Centre for Research in Economic Theory and its Applications CRETA.
    18. Hongpeng Guo & Zhihao Lv & Junyi Hua & Hongxu Yuan & Qingyu Yu, 2021. "Design of Combined Auction Model for Emission Rights of International Forestry Carbon Sequestration and Other Pollutants Based on SMRA," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-18, October.
    19. Vinci Chow, 2019. "Predicting Auction Price of Vehicle License Plate with Deep Residual Learning," Papers 1910.04879, arXiv.org.
    20. Yeon-Koo Che & Ian Gale, 1994. "Auctions with budget-constrained buyers: a nonequivalence result," Working Papers (Old Series) 9402, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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
    • C92 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Group Behavior
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • 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:zbw:qmsrps:202601. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dequbuk.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.