IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/rwirep/438.html

Unstructured Bargaining over an Endogenously Produced Surplus and Fairness Ideals – An Experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Luhan, Wolfgang J.
  • Poulsen, Odile
  • Roos, Michael W. M.

Abstract

Fairness considerations are important determinants of behavior in unstructured bargaining situations with equal bargaining power. If the surplus over which the bargaining takes place was created by separate, individual efforts, several entitlementrelated fairness ideals might be relevant. In our experiment we first elicit subjects' fairness ideals using a questionnaire. In the following production phase each player generates output by luck, individual effort and talent. We analyze whether the elicited fairness ideals guide subjects' behavior in the subsequent bargaining in which the joint output is distributed among two individuals. We find that bargaining claims deviate significantly from the elicited fairness ideals and are strongly related to performance if one individual had produced more than the partner. These findings contrast the previous literature on fairness ideals and enrich the findings on self-serving fairness.

Suggested Citation

  • Luhan, Wolfgang J. & Poulsen, Odile & Roos, Michael W. M., 2013. "Unstructured Bargaining over an Endogenously Produced Surplus and Fairness Ideals – An Experiment," Ruhr Economic Papers 438, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:rwirep:438
    DOI: 10.4419/86788495
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/83676/1/769101208.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.4419/86788495?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Emin Karagözoğlu & Arno Riedl, 2015. "Performance Information, Production Uncertainty, and Subjective Entitlements in Bargaining," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(11), pages 2611-2626, November.
    2. Angelovski, Andrej & Brandts, Jordi & Solà, Carles, 2021. "Equal and unequal profit sharing in highly interdependent work groups: A laboratory experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 232-252.
    3. Emin Karagözoglu & Martin G. Kocher, 2015. "Bargaining under Time Pressure," CESifo Working Paper Series 5685, CESifo.
    4. Tanjim Hossain & Elizabeth Lyons & Aloysius Siow, 2020. "Fairness considerations in joint venture formation," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(3), pages 632-667, September.
    5. Urs Fischbacher & Nadja Kairies-Schwarz & Ulrike Stefani, 2017. "Non-additivity and the Salience of Marginal Productivities: Experimental Evidence on Distributive Fairness," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 84(336), pages 587-610, October.
    6. Rodriguez-Lara, Ismael, 2016. "Equity and bargaining power in ultimatum games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 144-165.
    7. Konow, James & Saijo, Tatsuyoshi & Akai, Kenju, 2020. "Equity versus equality: Spectators, stakeholders and groups," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    8. Marja-Liisa Halko & Topi Miettinen, 2017. "From ideals to deals—The effect of impartiality experience on stakeholder behavior," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(8), pages 1-16, August.
    9. Bolton, Gary E. & Karagözoğlu, Emin, 2016. "On the influence of hard leverage in a soft leverage bargaining game: The importance of credible claims," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 164-179.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D39 - Microeconomics - - Distribution - - - Other
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement

    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:rwirep:438. 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.

    We have no bibliographic 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.

    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/rwiesde.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.