|
on Neuroeconomics |
|
Issue of 2011‒05‒07
two papers chosen by |
| By: | Pradiptyo, Rimawan; Sasmitasiwi, Banoon; Sahadewo, Gumilang Aryo |
| Abstract: | This paper aims to analyze subjects’ behavior in an experiment on evolutionary process of prisoners’ dilemma game. The experiment has been designed by using sixteen one-shot prisoners’ dilemma games with payoffs perturbation and random matching players under perfect information. The subjects of the experiment were students and staff in Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia. In contrast to previous studies, for instance Selten and Stoecker’s (1986) Cooper’s, et.al (1991, 1996), the majority of the subjects in this experiment tend to choose Nash equilibrium strategy consistently from the first game. The result showed that the proportion of the Nash equilibrium outcome was consistently in the range of 85%-88%, whereas the tacit cooperation or Pareto optimum outcome was about 1%-2%. There were evidence that payoffs perturbation influences players’ decision. In contrast to the previous studies above, the results from this study revealed that the vast majority of the subjects tend to choose the dominant strategy as prescribed in Game Theory. |
| Keywords: | Prisoners' dilemma; experiment; random-matching players; payoffs perturbation; framing effect |
| JEL: | C92 C73 |
| Date: | 2011–02–09 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:30480&r=neu |
| By: | Biel, Anders (Department of Psychology); Johansson-Stenman, Olof (Department of Economics, School of Business, Economics and Law, Göteborg University); Nilsson, Andreas (Department of Psychology) |
| Abstract: | While many earlier studies have found that people’s maximum willingness to pay for having a good is often substantially lower than their minimum willingness to accept not having it, more recent experimental evidence suggests that this discrepancy vanishes for standard consumption goods when an incentive-compatible design without misconceptions is used. This paper hypothesises that there is nevertheless a discrepancy for goods with a perceived moral character, such as contributions to a good cause, and moreover that the reason for this discrepancy can largely be explained by differences in emotions and moral perceptions. The results from a real-money dichotomous-choice experiment, combined with measurements of emotions and morality, are consistent with these hypotheses.<p> |
| Keywords: | Willingness to pay-Willingness to accept gap; Endowment effect; Emotions; Ethics; Experiments |
| JEL: | C91 H41 |
| Date: | 2011–04–28 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hhs:gunwpe:0497&r=neu |