General Economic Principles of Bargaining and Trade: Evidence From 2,000 Classroom Experiments

Lin, Po-Hsuan; Brown, Alexander; Imai, Taisuke; Wang, Joseph Tao‐yi; Wang, Stephanie; Camerer, Colin F.

doi:10.2139/ssrn.3250495

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our 2-player ultimatum game follows [ 1 ]. We find that offers from the proposer to the responder are mostly 50 percent of the pie or less, and the conditional acceptance rate is monotonically increasing in the proposed offer amount, which is consistent with [ 31 , 32 ]. A direct comparison of our dataset and that from [ 31 ] generates similar results in the distribution of proposal offers and conditional acceptance rate (see Section B in S1 File for details).…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 85%

Conducting large, repeated, multi-game economic experiments using mobile platforms

Lin

Kong³

et al. 2021

PLoS ONE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We demonstrate the possibility of conducting synchronous, repeated, multi-game economic decision-making experiments with hundreds of subjects in-person or remotely with live streaming using entirely mobile platforms. Our experiment provides important proof-of-concept that such experiments are not only possible, but yield recognizable results as well as new insights, blurring the line between laboratory and field experiments. Specifically, our findings from 8 different experimental economics games and tasks replicate existing results from traditional laboratory experiments despite the fact that subjects play those games/task in a specific order and regardless of whether the experiment was conducted in person or remotely. We further leverage our large subject population to study the effect of large (N = 100) versus small (N = 10) group sizes on behavior in three of the scalable games that we study. While our results are largely consistent with existing findings for small groups, increases in group size are shown to matter for the robustness of those findings.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 85%