IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/r/eee/jeborg/v2y1981i2p153-177.html

Sociological versus strategic factors in bargaining

Citations

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


Cited by:

  1. Demeulemeester, Tom & Goossens, Dries & Hermans, Ben & Leus, Roel, 2025. "Fair integer programming under dichotomous and cardinal preferences," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 320(3), pages 465-478.
  2. Isoni, Andrea & Poulsen, Anders & Sugden, Robert & Tsutsui, Kei, 2019. "Focal points and payoff information in tacit bargaining," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 193-214.
  3. Yildiz, Özgür, 2016. "Public-private partnerships, incomplete contracts, and distributional fairness – when payments matter," MPRA Paper 74552, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  4. Michael Spencer, 2010. "Loyalty, protocol, bargainer characteristics, and rationality in an experimental investigation of bilateral bargaining in dyads," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(9), pages 895-900.
  5. Pope, Devin G. & Pope, Jaren C. & Sydnor, Justin R., 2015. "Focal points and bargaining in housing markets," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 89-107.
  6. McGinn, Kathleen L. & Milkman, Katherine L. & Nöth, Markus, 2012. "Walking the talk in multiparty bargaining: An experimental investigation," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 278-291.
  7. Stephen Leider & William S. Lovejoy, 2016. "Bargaining in Supply Chains," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(10), pages 3039-3058, October.
  8. Sean P. Sullivan, 2016. "Why Wait to Settle? An Experimental Test of the Asymmetric-Information Hypothesis," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59(3), pages 497-525.
  9. Navarro, Noemí & Veszteg, Róbert F., 2020. "On the empirical validity of axioms in unstructured bargaining," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 117-145.
  10. Tom Demeulemeester & Dries Goossens & Ben Hermans & Roel Leus, 2023. "Fair integer programming under dichotomous and cardinal preferences," Papers 2306.13383, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2024.
  11. Bolton, Gary E., 1997. "The rationality of splitting equally," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 365-381, March.
  12. Navarro, Noemí & Veszteg, Róbert F., 2025. "On welfarism and scale invariance: What do bargainers bargain about?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 237(C).
  13. Dezső, Linda & Loewenstein, George & Steinhart, Jonathan & Neszveda, Gábor & Szászi, Barnabás, 2015. "The pernicious role of asymmetric history in negotiations," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 430-438.
  14. Costa-Gomes, Miguel A., 2002. "A Suggested Interpretation of Some Experimental Results on Preplay Communication," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 104(1), pages 104-136, May.
  15. Đula, Ivan & Größler, Andreas, 2021. "Inequity aversion in dynamically complex supply chains," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(1), pages 309-322.
  16. Hå Holm & Peter Engseld, 2005. "Choosing Bargaining Partners—An Experimental Study on the Impact of Information About Income, Status and Gender," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 8(3), pages 183-216, September.
  17. Jennie Huang & Judd B. Kessler & Muriel Niederle, 2024. "Fairness has less impact when agents are less informed," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 27(1), pages 155-174, March.
  18. Andrzej Baranski & Diogo Geraldes & Ada Kovaliukaite & James Tremewan, 2024. "An Experiment on Gender Representation in Majoritarian Bargaining," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 70(10), pages 6622-6636, October.
  19. Alvin E. Roth, 2007. "Repugnance as a Constraint on Markets," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 21(3), pages 37-58, Summer.
  20. Gary Goertz, 2004. "Constraints, Compromises, and Decision Making," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 48(1), pages 14-37, February.
  21. Christopher Bruce & Jeremy Clark, 2010. "The Efficiency of Direct Public Involvement in Environmental Policymaking: An Experimental Test," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 45(2), pages 157-182, February.
  22. Colin F. Camerer & Gideon Nave & Alec Smith, 2019. "Dynamic Unstructured Bargaining with Private Information: Theory, Experiment, and Outcome Prediction via Machine Learning," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(4), pages 1867-1890, April.
  23. Knez, Marc, 1998. "Precedent transfer in experimental conflict-of-interest games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 239-249, February.
  24. Owen R. Phillips & Amy M. Nagler & Dale J. Menkhaus & Christopher T. Bastian, 2010. "Experimental Work On Subsidies, Moral Hazard, And Market Power In Agricultural Markets," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 28(4), pages 488-501, October.
  25. Dezső, Linda & Loewenstein, George, 2019. "Self-serving invocations of shared and asymmetric history in negotiations," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
  26. Jack Fanning & Andrew Kloosterman, 2022. "An experimental test of the Coase conjecture: Fairness in dynamic bargaining," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 53(1), pages 138-165, March.
  27. Ken Binmore & A. Shaked & J. Sutton, 1997. "Testing Non-Cooperative Bargaining Theory: A Preliminary Study," Levine's Working Paper Archive 792, David K. Levine.
  28. Andrew M. Davis & Stephen Leider, 2018. "Contracts and Capacity Investment in Supply Chains," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 20(3), pages 403-421, July.
  29. Zintl, Reinhard, 1991. "Kooperation und die Aufteilung des Kooperationsgewinns bei horizontaler Politikverflechtung," MPIfG Discussion Paper 91/6, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
  30. Nobel Prize Committee, 2012. "Alvin E. Roth and Lloyd S. Shapley: Stable allocations and the practice of market design," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2012-1, Nobel Prize Committee.
  31. Tremewan, James, 2010. "Group Identity and Coalition Formation: Experiments in a three?player divide the dollar Game," CEPREMAP Working Papers (Docweb) 1020, CEPREMAP.
  32. Ochs, Jack & Roth, Alvin E, 1989. "An Experimental Study of Sequential Bargaining," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(3), pages 355-384, June.
  33. Gary Bolton, 1998. "Bargaining and Dilemma Games: From Laboratory Data Towards Theoretical Synthesis," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 1(3), pages 257-281, December.
  34. Smith, Gregory & Day, Brett, 2018. "Addressing the Collective Action Problem in Multiple-purchaser PES: An Experimental Investigation of Negotiated Payment Contributions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 36-58.
  35. Cheryl L. Eavey, 1991. "Patterns of Distribution in Spatial Games," Rationality and Society, , vol. 3(4), pages 450-474, October.
  36. Chang, Simon & Dee, Thomas S. & Tse, Chun Wing & Yu, Li, 2016. "Be a Good Samaritan to a Good Samaritan: Field evidence of other-regarding preferences in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 23-33.
  37. Noemí Navarro & Róbert F. Veszteg, 2025. "How robust is the equal split? Transferable utility and three-person bargaining in the laboratory," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 23(3), pages 909-931, September.
  38. repec:clg:wpaper:2009-18 is not listed on IDEAS
  39. Christopher Bruce & Jeremy Clark, "undated". "Using Collaborative Bargaining to Develop Environmental Policy when Information is Private," Working Papers 2011-07, Department of Economics, University of Calgary, revised 11 Mar 2011.
  40. Chang, Simon & Dee, Thomas S. & Tse, Chun-Wing & Yu, Li, 2015. "Be a Good Samaritan to a Good Samaritan: Field Evidence of Interdependent Other-Regarding Preferences in China," IZA Discussion Papers 9319, IZA Network @ LISER.
  41. Christopher Bruce & Jeremy Clark, 2012. "The Impact Of Entitlements And Equity On Cooperative Bargaining: An Experiment," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 50(4), pages 867-879, October.
  42. Fehr, Ernst & Schmidt, Klaus M., 2005. "The Economics of Fairness, Reciprocity and Altruism – Experimental Evidence and New Theories," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 66, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.
  43. Cochard François & Couprie Helene & Hopfensitz Astrid, 2009. "Do Spouses Cooperate? And If Not: Why?," Thema Working Papers 2009-10, THEMA (Théorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), CY Cergy-Paris University, ESSEC and CNRS.
  44. Alice F. Stuhlmacher & Matthew V. Champagne, 2000. "The Impact of Time Pressure and Information on Negotiation Process and Decisions," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 9(6), pages 471-491, November.
  45. Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, "undated". "Theories of Fairness and Reciprocity - Evidence and Economic Applications," IEW - Working Papers 075, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
  46. repec:clg:wpaper:2008-20 is not listed on IDEAS
  47. Dezső, Linda & Loewenstein, George, 2019. "Self-serving invocations of shared and asymmetric history in negotiations," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
  48. Roth, Alvin E & Murnighan, J Keith, 1982. "The Role of Information in Bargaining: An Experimental Study," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(5), pages 1123-1142, September.
  49. Holm, Hakan & Engseld, Peter, 2001. "Choosing Bargaining Partners - An experimental study on the impact of information about income and gender," Working Papers 2001:10, Lund University, Department of Economics, revised 30 Jul 2001.
IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.