CronoDAS comments on Interlude for Behavioral Economics - Less Wrong

49 Post author: Yvain 06 July 2012 08:12PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (49)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: CronoDAS 06 July 2012 08:29:14AM 4 points [-]

I wonder what people do in this Ultimatum Game "variant":

Player A and B have a contest of some sort (for example, they might run a race, or play a game of checkers, or whatever), and the winner of the contest gets to be the one who makes the proposal in the Ultimatum Game.

The game theory is the same, the social context is quite different...

Comment author: bentarm 06 July 2012 01:36:12PM 4 points [-]

I managed to find this. There is a noticeable tendency for proposers to keep more of the money if they have earned it. This is especially pronounced in the Dictator Game, but also exists in the Ultimatum Game.

Comment author: sixes_and_sevens 06 July 2012 09:21:05AM 3 points [-]

Although I can't recall where I got it from, and Google is failing me, I'm pretty sure there's a body of experimental evidence along these lines, showing that the second player is overwhelmingly more likely to accept an unfair split if the roles are designated in a way you describe.

Comment author: Matt_Simpson 06 July 2012 04:54:32PM *  1 point [-]

I don't have time to find an example right now, but I have some experience in this field and just want to affirm sixes_and_sevens' assertion.