Ultimatum bargaining with a group: Underestimating the importance of the decision rule

被引:33
|
作者
Messick, DM
Moore, DA
Bazerman, MH
机构
关键词
D O I
10.1006/obhd.1997.2678
中图分类号
B849 [应用心理学];
学科分类号
040203 ;
摘要
The three experiments presented here modified the standard ultimatum game by having a committee of five people either accept or reject offers made by one allocator. Although the decision rule the committee used to decide whether to accept or reject the offer had a large effect on the optimal allocation strategy, we hypothesized that allocators would have difficulty incorporating the implications of the committee's decision rule into their allocation decisions. Experiment 1 found subjects to be very insensitive to decision rule. In fact, decision rule had no effect on allocation decisions. Experiment 2 made the decision rule and its implications more obvious to subjects, but allocations still deviated from the strategies that would have maximized winnings. Experiment 3 provided convincing evidence that the reasons for these deviations from the maximizing strategy have to do with insensitivity to the implications of the group's decision rule and with the difficulty in thinking accurately about the cognitions of others. (C) 1997 Academic Press.
引用
收藏
页码:87 / 101
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] High Stakes and Acceptance Behavior in Ultimatum Bargaining:
    Bertrand Munier
    Costin Zaharia
    Theory and Decision, 2002, 53 : 187 - 207
  • [32] Identification of player types in ultimatum bargaining games
    Vesely, Stepan
    MATHEMATICAL METHODS IN ECONOMICS (MME 2014), 2014, : 1074 - 1077
  • [33] Ultimatum bargaining with envy under incomplete information
    Gonzalez-Sanchez, Eric
    Loyola, Gino
    MATHEMATICAL SOCIAL SCIENCES, 2024, 127 : 1 - 11
  • [34] Equilibrium opacity in ultimatum-offer bargaining
    Konrad, Kai A.
    Thum, Marcel
    JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ECONOMIC THEORY, 2020, 22 (05) : 1515 - 1529
  • [35] Non-acceptance of Losses-An Experimental Study on the Importance of the Sign of Final Outcomes in Ultimatum Bargaining
    Neumann, Thomas
    Schosser, Stephan
    Vogt, Bodo
    OPERATIONS RESEARCH PROCEEDINGS 2017, 2018, : 287 - 292
  • [36] Ultimatum bargaining behavior of people affected by schizophrenia
    Agay, Nint
    Kron, Shmuel
    Carmel, Ziv
    Mendlovic, Shlomo
    Levkovitz, Yechiel
    PSYCHIATRY RESEARCH, 2008, 157 (1-3) : 39 - 46
  • [37] Ultimatum bargaining: Algorithms vs. Humans
    Ozkes, Ali I.
    Hanaki, Nobuyuki
    Vanderelst, Dieter
    Willems, Jurgen
    ECONOMICS LETTERS, 2024, 244
  • [38] Adaptive learning versus punishment in ultimatum bargaining
    Abbink, K
    Bolton, GE
    Sadrieh, A
    Tang, FF
    GAMES AND ECONOMIC BEHAVIOR, 2001, 37 (01) : 1 - 25
  • [39] UNDERESTIMATING THE IMPORTANCE OF THE IMPLEMENTATIONAL LEVEL
    VANKLEECK, M
    BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES, 1987, 10 (03) : 497 - 498
  • [40] The ultimatum bargaining game: An adaptation for teaching ethics
    Bertolami, Charles N.
    Opazo, Cristian
    Janal, Malvin N.
    JOURNAL OF DENTAL EDUCATION, 2022, 86 (04) : 437 - 442