A Laboratory Study of Group Polarisation in the Team Dictator Game

Cason, Timothy N.; Mui, Vai-Lam

doi:10.1111/1468-0297.00233

Cited by 104 publications

(126 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

120

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…18 This shows that group members apply different strategies in determining their final bids. To further see how groups reach their decisions, we estimate the following "bargaining" equation (Cason and Mui, 1997):…”

Section: Figure 45 -Absolute Difference Between Proposals and Bids Omentioning

confidence: 99%

Can groups solve the problem of over-bidding in contests?

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study reports an experiment that examines whether groups can better comply with theoretical predictions than individuals in contests. Our experiment replicates previous findings that individual players significantly overbid relative to theoretical predictions, incurring substantial losses. There is high variance in individual bids and strong heterogeneity across individual players. The new findings of our experiment are that groups make 25% lower bids, their bids have lower variance, and group bids are less heterogeneous than individual bids. Therefore, groups receive significantly higher and more homogeneous payoffs than individuals. We elicit individual and group preferences towards risk using simple lotteries. The results indicate that groups make less risky decisions, which is a possible explanation for lower bids in contests. Most importantly, we find that groups learn to make lower bids from communication and negotiation between group members.JEL Classifications: C72, C91, C92, D72

show abstract

Section: Figure 45 -Absolute Difference Between Proposals and Bids Omentioning

confidence: 99%

Can groups solve the problem of over-bidding in contests?

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Wildschut, Pinter, Vevea, Insko and Schopler (2003) provide a meta-analysis of the subject, while Charness, Rigotti and Rustichini (2007) is a more recent contribution in economics. Other treatments investigate centipede games (Bornstein, Kugler and Ziegelmeyer, 2004), ultimatum games (Bornstein and Yaniv, 1998;Robert and Carnevale, 1997) and dictator games (Cason and Mui, 1997;Luhan, Kocher and Sutter, 2009). Closest to our work is Kocher and Sutter (2007), who investigate gift exchange games similar to ours.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…3 Among the papers closest to our experimental design, Cason and Mui (1997) use two-person groups, while Luhan et al (2009) use three-person groups. 4 In the gift-exchange games, ordering is based on the extent of reciprocation of the first mover's gift.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…15 Cason and Mui (1997) and Luhan et al (2009) also solicit individual-for-individual decisions, besides group decisions, but they did not solicit individual-for-group decisions, which is the central component of our analysis. Furthermore, in these studies, individuals interact with individuals, and groups interact with groups, while the first-mover in our gift-exchange game is always an individual.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How Individual Preferences Get Aggregated in Groups - An Experimental Study

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper experimentally investigates how individual preferences, through unrestricted deliberation, get aggregated into a group decision in two contexts: reciprocating gifts, and choosing between lotteries. In both contexts we find that median group members have a significant impact on the group decision, but particular other members also have some influence. Non-median members closer to the median tend to have more influence than other members. By investigating the same individual's influence in different groups, we find evidence for relative position in the group having a direct effect on influence. We do not find evidence that group choice exhibits a shift in a particular direction that is independent of member preferences and caused by the group decision context itself. We also find that group deliberation not only involves bargaining and compromise, but it also involves persuasion: preferences tend to shift towards the choice of the individual's previous group, especially for those with extreme individual preferences.

show abstract

“…This leads to the prediction that groups will outperform individuals on highly demonstrable tasks (Laughlin, et al, 1976;Laughlin and Ellis, 1986;Davis, 1992). Cason and Mui (1997) study individual and group decisions in the dictator game and explore the group polarization hypothesis (Isenberg, 1986) that group decision-making selects extreme rather than modal individual outcomes. Blinder and Morgan (2005) report that groups make better decisions than individuals in two macro economy "steering" tasks.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%