On the empirical validity of axioms in unstructured bargaining

被引:3
|
作者
Navarro, Noemi [1 ]
Veszteg, Robert F. [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Bordeaux, GREThA UMR CNRS 5113, 6 Ave Leon Duguit, F-33608 Pessac, France
[2] Waseda Univ, Sch Polit Sci & Econ, Shinjuku Ku, 1-6-1 Nishiwaseda, Tokyo 1698050, Japan
关键词
Bilateral bargaining; Experiments; Nash bargaining solution; Equal-division solution; Deal-me-out solution; Individual rationality; Scale invariance; EXPERIMENTAL ECONOMICS; PROPORTIONAL SOLUTIONS; BEHAVIOR; INFORMATION; POWER; GAME; JOB;
D O I
10.1016/j.geb.2020.01.003
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
We report experimental results and test axiomatic models of unstructured bargaining by checking the empirical relevance of the underlying axioms. Our data support strong efficiency, symmetry, independence of irrelevant alternatives and monotonicity, and reject scale invariance. Individual rationality and midpoint domination are violated by a significant fraction of agreements that implement equal division in highly unequal circumstances. Two well-known bargaining solutions that satisfy the confirmed properties explain the observed agreements reasonably well. The most frequent agreements in our sample are the ones suggested by the equal-division solution. In terms of the average Euclidean distance, the theoretical solution that best explains the data is the deal-me-out solution (Sutton, 1986; Binmore et al., 1989, 1991). Popular solutions that satisfy scale invariance, individual rationality, and midpoint domination, as the well-known Nash or Kalai-Smorodinsky bargaining solutions, perform poorly in the laboratory. (C) 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:117 / 145
页数:29
相关论文
共 50 条