IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login

Citations for "Do Wealth Differences Affect Fairness Considerations?"

by Olivier Armantier

For a complete description of this item, click here. For a RSS feed for citations of this item, click here.
as in new window

  1. Gianandrea Staffiero & Filippos Exadaktylos & Antonio M. Espín, 2013. "Accepting Zero in the Ultimatum Game: Selfish Nash Response?," ThE Papers 13/01, Department of Economic Theory and Economic History of the University of Granada..
  2. Olivier Armantier & Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Giorgio Topa & Wilbert van der Klaauw & Basit Zafar, 2011. "Inflation expectations and behavior: Do survey respondents act on their beliefs?," Staff Reports 509, Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
  3. Sophie Clot & Gilles Grolleau & Lisette Ibanez, 2014. "An experimental analysis from a taking game in Madagascar," Working Papers 14-02, LAMETA, Universtiy of Montpellier, revised Jan 2014.
  4. Jeroen Hinloopen & Wieland Müller & Hans-Theo Normann, 2011. "Output Commitment through Product Bundling: Experimental Evidence," Vienna Economics Papers 1112, University of Vienna, Department of Economics.
  5. Lisa Anderson & Jennifer Mellor & Jeffrey Milyo, 2006. "Induced heterogeneity in trust experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 9(3), pages 223-235, September.
  6. Guido Baltussen & G. Post & Martijn Assem & Peter Wakker, 2012. "Random incentive systems in a dynamic choice experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 418-443, September.
  7. Cochard, François & Couprie, Hélène & Hopfensitz, Astrid, 2009. "Do Spouses Cooperate? And If Not: Why?," TSE Working Papers 09-134, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
  8. Smith, Alexander, 2011. "Income inequality in the trust game," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 111(1), pages 54-56, April.
  9. McGee, Peter & Constantinides, Stelios, 2013. "Repeated play and gender in the ultimatum game," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 121-126.
  10. Olivier Armantier, 2006. "Estimates of Own Lethal Risks and Anchoring Effects," CIRANO Working Papers 2006s-14, CIRANO.
  11. Gianandrea Staffiero & Filippos Exadaktylos & Antonio M. Espín, 2012. "Accepting Zero in the Ultimatum Game Does Not Reflect Selfish Preferences," Working Papers 201203, Murat Sertel Center for Advanced Economic Studies, Istanbul Bilgi University.
  12. Grimalday, Gianluca & Karz, Anirban & Proto, Eugenio, 2012. "Everyone Wants a Chance: Initial Positions and Fairness in Ultimatum Games," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 93, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
  13. Ben D'Exelle & Els Lecoutere & Bjorn Van Campenhout, 2010. "Social status and bargaining when resources are scarce: Evidence from a field lab experiment," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Behavioural and Experimental Social Science (CBESS) 10-09, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
  14. Traub, Stefan & Seidl, Christian & Schmidt, Ulrich, 2009. "An experimental study on individual choice, social welfare, and social preferences," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(4), pages 385-400, May.
  15. David Cooper & E. Dutcher, 2011. "The dynamics of responder behavior in ultimatum games: a meta-study," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 519-546, November.
  16. Fréchette, Guillaume R., 2009. "Learning in a multilateral bargaining experiment," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 153(2), pages 183-195, December.
  17. Fischer, Sven & Güth, Werner, 2012. "Effects of exclusion on acceptance in ultimatum games," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 1100-1114.
  18. Zizzo, Daniel John, 2013. "Claims and confounds in economic experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 186-195.
  19. James C. Cox & Vjollca Sadiraj & Ulrich Schmidt, 2011. "Paradoxes and Mechanisms for Choice under Risk," Experimental Economics Center Working Paper Series 2011-07, Experimental Economics Center, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University, revised Mar 2014.
  20. Dickinson, David L. & Oxoby, Robert J., 2007. "Cognitive Dissonance, Pessimism, and Behavioral Spillover Effects," IZA Discussion Papers 2832, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  21. Enrico Diecidue & Peter Wakker & Marcel Zeelenberg, 2007. "Eliciting decision weights by adapting de Finetti’s betting-odds method to prospect theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 179-199, June.
  22. van de Kuilen, G. & Wakker, P.P., 2011. "The midweight method to measure attitudes towards risk and ambiguity," Other publications TiSEM c58a6884-24cc-4cab-ae2f-a, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
  23. Peter Wakker & Veronika Köbberling & Christiane Schwieren, 2007. "Prospect-theory’s Diminishing Sensitivity Versus Economics’ Intrinsic Utility of Money: How the Introduction of the Euro can be Used to Disentangle the Two Empirically," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 63(3), pages 205-231, November.
  24. repec:ner:tilbur:urn:nbn:nl:ui:12-4275073 is not listed on IDEAS
  25. Subhashish Modak Chowdhury & Joo Young Jeon, 2012. "Income effect and altruism," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Behavioural and Experimental Social Science (CBESS) 12-04, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
  26. Chowdhury, Subhasish M. & Jeon, Joo Young, 2014. "Impure altruism or inequality aversion?: An experimental investigation based on income effects," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 143-150.
This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.