{"title":"内源性冷却期","authors":"Mark van Oldeniel, Noemi Peter","doi":"10.1016/j.jebo.2025.107237","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>We run an ultimatum game experiment where cool-off periods can emerge endogenously, that is, where proposers can <em>decide</em> to impose a waiting period on responders. Previous research focused on cool-off periods that were <em>exogenously imposed</em> by the researcher, but in real life people can make deliberate choices to impose such periods on others for strategic reasons. Since in our experiment cool-off periods can be imposed endogenously, we can answer several novel research questions. First, how willing are individuals to impose endogenous cool-off periods on others? Second, do offers change if cool-off is an option? Third, are endogenously imposed cool-offs effective? Finally, how does the possibility of imposing an endogenous cool-off period affect bargaining breakdowns and earnings? We find that 40% of proposers choose to impose a cool-off period on responders. Proposers make significantly lower offers when they can impose a cool-off period on responders. Endogenous cool-off periods are not effective in increasing the overall acceptance rate. The possibility to create an endogenous cool-off period does not have a significant effect on bargaining breakdowns or earnings overall. However, it lowers responder earnings significantly, as it allows proposers to exploit the timing choice to make a lower offer. Our results highlight that instead of helping to solve conflicts, the possibility to create cool-off periods hurts the less powerful party.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48409,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization","volume":"238 ","pages":"Article 107237"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Endogenous cool-off periods\",\"authors\":\"Mark van Oldeniel, Noemi Peter\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jebo.2025.107237\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>We run an ultimatum game experiment where cool-off periods can emerge endogenously, that is, where proposers can <em>decide</em> to impose a waiting period on responders. Previous research focused on cool-off periods that were <em>exogenously imposed</em> by the researcher, but in real life people can make deliberate choices to impose such periods on others for strategic reasons. Since in our experiment cool-off periods can be imposed endogenously, we can answer several novel research questions. First, how willing are individuals to impose endogenous cool-off periods on others? Second, do offers change if cool-off is an option? Third, are endogenously imposed cool-offs effective? Finally, how does the possibility of imposing an endogenous cool-off period affect bargaining breakdowns and earnings? We find that 40% of proposers choose to impose a cool-off period on responders. Proposers make significantly lower offers when they can impose a cool-off period on responders. Endogenous cool-off periods are not effective in increasing the overall acceptance rate. The possibility to create an endogenous cool-off period does not have a significant effect on bargaining breakdowns or earnings overall. However, it lowers responder earnings significantly, as it allows proposers to exploit the timing choice to make a lower offer. Our results highlight that instead of helping to solve conflicts, the possibility to create cool-off periods hurts the less powerful party.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48409,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization\",\"volume\":\"238 \",\"pages\":\"Article 107237\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167268125003567\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167268125003567","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
We run an ultimatum game experiment where cool-off periods can emerge endogenously, that is, where proposers can decide to impose a waiting period on responders. Previous research focused on cool-off periods that were exogenously imposed by the researcher, but in real life people can make deliberate choices to impose such periods on others for strategic reasons. Since in our experiment cool-off periods can be imposed endogenously, we can answer several novel research questions. First, how willing are individuals to impose endogenous cool-off periods on others? Second, do offers change if cool-off is an option? Third, are endogenously imposed cool-offs effective? Finally, how does the possibility of imposing an endogenous cool-off period affect bargaining breakdowns and earnings? We find that 40% of proposers choose to impose a cool-off period on responders. Proposers make significantly lower offers when they can impose a cool-off period on responders. Endogenous cool-off periods are not effective in increasing the overall acceptance rate. The possibility to create an endogenous cool-off period does not have a significant effect on bargaining breakdowns or earnings overall. However, it lowers responder earnings significantly, as it allows proposers to exploit the timing choice to make a lower offer. Our results highlight that instead of helping to solve conflicts, the possibility to create cool-off periods hurts the less powerful party.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization is devoted to theoretical and empirical research concerning economic decision, organization and behavior and to economic change in all its aspects. Its specific purposes are to foster an improved understanding of how human cognitive, computational and informational characteristics influence the working of economic organizations and market economies and how an economy structural features lead to various types of micro and macro behavior, to changing patterns of development and to institutional evolution. Research with these purposes that explore the interrelations of economics with other disciplines such as biology, psychology, law, anthropology, sociology and mathematics is particularly welcome.