Search Papers

David J Cooper, John H Kagel, Qing Liang Gu, Wei Lo

Cited by*: 41 Downloads*: 13

We examine strategic interactions between firms and planners in China, comparing behavior between: (i) students and managers with field experience with this situation, (ii) standard versus increased monetary incentives, and (iii) sessions conducted "in context", making explicit reference to interactions between planners and managers, and those without any such references. The dynamics of play are similar across treatments with play only gradually, and incompletely, converging on a pooling equilibrium. A fivefold increase in incentives significantly increases initial levels of strategic play. Games played in context generated greater levels of strategic play for managers, with minimal impact on students.

Douglas Dyer, John H Kagel

Cited by*: 7 Downloads*: 29

Experienced construction industry executives suffer from a winner's curse in laboratory common value auction markets (Dyer et al. [Dyer, D., J. H. Kagel, D. Levin. 1989. A comparison of naive and experienced bidders in common value offer auctions: Laboratory analysis. Econom. J. 99 108-115.]). This paper identifies essential differences between field environments and the economic theory underlying the laboratory markets that account for the executives' success in the field and a winner's curse in the lab. These are (1) industry-specific mechanisms which enable contractors to escape the winner's curse even when they bid too low, (2) learned, industry-specific evaluative processes which enable experienced contractors to avoid the winner's curse in the first place, and (3) important private value elements that underlie bidding. Also identified are a number of industry-specific bidding characteristics whose evolution can be explained using modern auction theory. Lessons are drawn regarding the use of experimental methods in economics.

Raymond C Battalio, John H Kagel, Don N MacDonald

Cited by*: 10 Downloads*: 37

In an earlier paper (Raymond C. Battalio, John H. Kagel, and Don N. Mac Donald, 1985), we reported Allais-type violations of the independence axiom of expected utility theory with rats choosing over positively valued payoffs (food rewards). This note extends this research, examining animals' choices over losses, testing for (1) standard Allais-type common ratio effect violations of expected utility theory and (2) fanning out of indifference curves for random prospects, tests of Mark J. Machina's (1982, 1987) hypothesis II (hereafter H2), over previously unexplored areas of the unit probability triangle. Results from a parallel series of experiments using human subjects choosing over real losses are also reported. For both rats and people, we find standard Allais-type violations of expected utility theory and a systematic failure of the fanning out hypothesis in the southeast corner of the unit probability triangle, in the case of losses. Thus, the fanning out hypothesis (Machina 1982, 1987) cannot provide a satisfactory explanation for behavioral deviations from expected utility theory.

Raymond C Battalio, Leonard Green, John H Kagel

Cited by*: 22 Downloads*: 70

No abstract available