Social Preferences, Efficiency and Personal Values in Ultimatum Bargaining

J. Lönnqvist, M. Verkasalo, G. Walkowitz, P. Wichardt
{"title":"Social Preferences, Efficiency and Personal Values in Ultimatum Bargaining","authors":"J. Lönnqvist, M. Verkasalo, G. Walkowitz, P. Wichardt","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2240366","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"How do people trade off efficiency against equality concerns? To study this question, we conducted a modified mini ultimatum game (N=120) in which proposers were asked to choose between offering 8:2 and y:y, y∈{5, 4.5, 4,.., 0.5}; all offers in Euro. According to the data, 58 of 60 proposers have a unique switching point towards the unequal split and the majority of switching occurs between 3.5:3.5 and 2:2. Regarding the variance of the switching, we find that subjects with a comparably high interest in control over resources (higher Power values) tend to switch earlier. Moreover, after reversing roles, subjects who have previously been responders show a far stronger inclination to stick to the equal split indicating that knowing how it is to be in the other's shoes increases other-regarding behaviour.","PeriodicalId":104123,"journal":{"name":"Negotiation Processes & Communications eJournal","volume":"231 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Negotiation Processes & Communications eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2240366","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

How do people trade off efficiency against equality concerns? To study this question, we conducted a modified mini ultimatum game (N=120) in which proposers were asked to choose between offering 8:2 and y:y, y∈{5, 4.5, 4,.., 0.5}; all offers in Euro. According to the data, 58 of 60 proposers have a unique switching point towards the unequal split and the majority of switching occurs between 3.5:3.5 and 2:2. Regarding the variance of the switching, we find that subjects with a comparably high interest in control over resources (higher Power values) tend to switch earlier. Moreover, after reversing roles, subjects who have previously been responders show a far stronger inclination to stick to the equal split indicating that knowing how it is to be in the other's shoes increases other-regarding behaviour.
最后通牒议价中的社会偏好、效率与个人价值观
人们如何权衡效率与平等的关系?为了研究这个问题,我们进行了一个改进的迷你最后通牒博弈(N=120),要求提议者在8:2和y之间做出选择:y, y∈{5,4.5,4,…0.5};所有报价均为欧元。数据显示,60个提议者中有58个有一个独特的不均匀分割切换点,大多数切换发生在3.5:3.5和2:2之间。关于切换的方差,我们发现对控制资源(更高的Power值)有较高兴趣的受试者倾向于更早切换。此外,在角色互换后,之前是反应者的受试者表现出更强的倾向于坚持平等的分裂,这表明知道如何站在别人的立场上会增加考虑他人的行为。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书