Experimental Economics

, Volume 17, Issue 2, pp 335–345 | Cite as

Elicitation effects in a multi-stage bargaining experiment

Original Paper

Abstract

We examine elicitation effects in a multi-stage bargaining experiment with escalating stakes conducted under direct-response and strategy-method elicitation. We find a significantly greater incidence of decisions leading to bargaining failure under direct responses. In addition, the predictive power of alternative risk attitude measures differs between the elicitation methods. Potential sources of the effects and resulting implications are discussed.

Keywords

Elicitation effects Bargaining Emotion Escalation 

JEL Classification

B49 C72 C90 C91 

References

  1. Allred, K. G., Mallozzi, J. S., Matsui, F., & Raia, C. P. (1997). The influence of anger and compassion on negotiation performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 70, 175–187. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barry, B., Fulmer, I. S., & Van Kleef, G. A. (2004). I laughed, I cried, I settled: the role of emotions in negotiations. In M. J. Gelfand & J. M. Brett (Eds.), The handbook of negotiation and culture (pp. 71–94). Stanford: Stanford University Press. Google Scholar
  3. Bohnet, I., Greig, F., Herrmann, B., & Zeckhauser, R. (2008). Betrayal aversion: evidence from Brazil, China, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Emirates and the United States. The American Economic Review, 98(1), 294–310. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bornstein, G., Schram, A., & Sonnemans, J. (2004). Do democracies breed chickens? In R. Suleiman, D. Budescu, I. Fischer, & D. Messick (Eds.), Contemporary psychological research on social dilemmas (pp. 248–268). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
  5. Brandstätter, H., & Königstein, M. (2001). Personality influences on ultimatum bargaining decisions. European Journal of Personality, 15, S53–S70. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brandts, J., & Charness, G. (2000). Hot vs. cold: sequential responses in simple experimental games. Experimental Economics, 2(3), 227–238. Google Scholar
  7. Brandts, J., & Charness, G. (2011). The strategy versus the direct-response method: a first survey of experimental comparisons. Experimental Economics, 14(3), 375–398. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Buchan, N. R., Croson, R. T. A., & Dawes, R. M. (2002). Swift neighbors and persistent strangers: a cross-cultural investigation of trust and reciprocity in social exchange. American Journal of Sociology, 108(1), 168–206. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Buchan, N. R., Johnson, E. J., & Croson, R. T. A. (2006). Let’s get personal: an international examination of the influence of communication, culture and social distance on other regarding preference. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 3, 373–398. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Camerer, C. (2003). Behavioral game theory: experiments in strategic interaction. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Google Scholar
  11. Campos, J., Ericsson, N. R., & Hendry, D. F. (2005). General-to-specific modelling. Cheltenham Glos: Edward Elgar. Google Scholar
  12. Charness, G., Gneezy, U., & Imas, A. (2013). Experimental methods: eliciting risk preferences. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 87, 43–51. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chuah, S. H., Hoffmann, R., Jones, M., & Williams, G. (2007). Do cultures clash? Evidence from cross-national ultimatum game experiments. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 64(1), 35–48. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chuah, S. H., Hoffmann, R., Jones, M. K., & Williams, G. A. (2009). An economic anatomy of culture: attitudes and behaviour in inter- and intra-national ultimatum game experiments. Journal of Economic Psychology, 30(5), 732–744. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cooper, D. J., Kagel, J. H., Lo, W., & Gu, Q. L. (1999). Gaming against managers in incentive systems: experimental results with Chinese students and Chinese managers. The American Economic Review, 89(4), 781–804. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. de Heus, P., Hoogervost, N., & van Dijk, E. (2010). Framing prisoners and chickens: valence effects in the prisoner’s dilemma and the chicken game. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 736–742. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dohmen, T., Falk, A., Huffman, D., Sunde, U., Schupp, J., & Wagner, G. G. (2011). Individual risk attitudes: measurement, determinants and behavioral consequences. Journal of the European Economic Association, 9(3), 522–550. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Engelmann, D., & Steiner, J. (2007). The effects of risk preferences in mixed-strategy equilibria of 2×2 games. Games and Economic Behavior, 60, 381–388. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fan, C. P. (2000). Teaching children cooperation—an application of experimental game theory. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 41, 191–209. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fischbacher, U. (2007). z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments. Experimental Economics, 10(2), 171–178. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Glasl, F. (1982). The process of conflict escalation and roles of third parties. In G. B. J. Bomers & R. B. Peterson (Eds.), Conflict management and industrial relations (pp. 119–140). Boston: Kluwer Academic. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hemesath, M. (1994). Cooperate or defect? Russian and American students in a prisoner’s dilemma. Comparative Economic Studies, 36(1), 83–93. Google Scholar
  23. Herrmann, B., Thöni, C., & Gächter, S. (2008). Antisocial punishment across societies. Science, 319, 1362–1367. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hoffmann, R., & Tee, J. Y. (2006). Adolescent-adult interactions and culture in the ultimatum game. Journal of Economic Psychology, 27(1), 98–116. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Holt, C. A., & Laury, S. K. (2002). Risk aversion and incentive effects. The American Economic Review, 92(5), 1644–1655. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kachelmeier, S. J., & Shehata, M. (1992). Culture and competition: a laboratory market competition between China and the West. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 19(2), 145–168. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lönnqvist, J. E., Verkasalo, M., Walkowitz, G., & Wichardt, P. C. (2011). Measuring individual risk attitudes in the lab: task or ask? An empirical comparison (Working paper). May 22, 2010. Google Scholar
  28. Maynard Smith, J. (1974). Theory of games and the evolution of animal contests. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 47, 209–221. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. McKelvey, R. D., & Palfrey, R. T. (1998). Quantal response equilibria for extensive form games. Experimental Economics, 1(1), 9–41. Google Scholar
  30. Pruitt, D. G., & Kim, S. H. (2003). Social conflict: escalation, stalemate, and settlement (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Google Scholar
  31. Roth, A. E. (1995). Bargaining experiments. In J. H. Kagel & A. E. Roth (Eds.), The handbook of experimental economics (pp. 253–348). Princeton: Princeton University Press. Google Scholar
  32. Rubinstein, A. (1982). Perfect equilibrium in a bargaining model. Econometrica, 50(1), 97–109. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Shubik, M. (1971). The dollar auction game: a paradox in noncooperative behavior and escalation. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 15(1), 109–111. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sloman, S. A. (1996). The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 119(1), 3–22. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Slovic, P., Finucane, M. L., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2004). Risk as analysis and risk as feelings: some thoughts about affect, reason, risk, and rationality. Risk Analysis, 24(2), 311–322. 2004. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Thompson, L., Neale, M., & Sinaceur, M. (2004). The evolution of cognition and biases in negotiation research. In M. J. Gelfand & J. M. Brett (Eds.), The handbook of negotiation and culture (pp. 7–44). Stanford: Stanford University Press. Google Scholar
  37. van Gelder, J. L., de Vries, R. E., & van der Pligt, J. (2009). Evaluating a dual-process model of risk: affect and cognition as determinants of risky choice. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 22(1), 45–61. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Economic Science Association 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Swee-Hoon Chuah
    • 1
  • Robert Hoffmann
    • 1
  • Jeremy Larner
    • 1
  1. 1.Nottingham University Business SchoolNottinghamUK

Personalised recommendations