Ultimatum Bargaining Experiments: The State of the Art

In the basic ultimatum bargaining game two players, P1 and P2, must divide a pie ( ). P1 proposes a division in which he gets x and P2 gets x. P2 can then accept the division, in which the is split according to P1's proposal, or reject the proposal, in which case neither player gets anything. The current paper reviews empirical research on ultimatum bargaining games. It covers early work starting with Guth et al. (1982), but largely fo- cuses on more recent work (post Roth (1995)). Taken together, the research suggests that P1's behavior in largely in accord with game theoretic income-maximization, but P2's behavior cannot be easily reconciled with standard game-theoretic assumptions. Rather, P2 seems to be driven by a sense of fairness, specifically, a desire to be treated fairly by P1. Both P1 and P2 behavior are in agree- ment with equity theory. The most important conclusion that falls out of this review is that players' motivations, which often are not the ones posited by traditional game theory (and neo-classical eco- nomics, in general), and their perceptions of others' motivations are of fundamental importance in understanding strategic interac- tion. Other ultimatum bargaining findings are reported as well. Future research directions are suggested throughout.

[1]  Alvin E. Roth,et al.  Learning in High Stakes Ultimatum Games: An Experiment in the Slovak Republic , 1998 .

[2]  Kevin Keasey,et al.  Gambling with the house money in capital expenditure decisions: An experimental analysis , 1996 .

[3]  Matthew L. Spitzer,et al.  Entitlements, Rights, and Fairness: An Experimental Examination of Subjects' Concepts of Distributive Justice , 1985, The Journal of Legal Studies.

[4]  Tilman Slembeck Reputations and Fairness in Bargaining - Experimental Evidence from a Repeated Ultimatum Game With Fixed Opponents , 1999 .

[5]  L. Cameron,et al.  Raising the Stakes in the Ultimatum Game: Experimental Evidence From Indonesia , 1999 .

[6]  Catherine C. Eckel,et al.  Altruism in Anonymous Dictator Games , 1996 .

[7]  Gary E. Bolton,et al.  Dictator game giving: Rules of fairness versus acts of kindness , 1998, Int. J. Game Theory.

[8]  Axel Ockenfels,et al.  An experimental solidarity game , 1998 .

[9]  Andrew Schotter,et al.  Fairness and survival in ultimatum and dictatorship games , 1996 .

[10]  Charles A. Holt,et al.  Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects , 2002 .

[11]  Bradley J. Ruffle More Is Better, But Fair Is Fair: Tipping in Dictator and Ultimatum Games , 1998 .

[12]  R. Trivers The Evolution of Reciprocal Altruism , 1971, The Quarterly Review of Biology.

[13]  Colin Camerer,et al.  The Effects of Financial Incentives in Experiments: A Review and Capital-Labor-Production Framework , 1999 .

[14]  Ilan Yaniv,et al.  Individual and Group Behavior in the Ultimatum Game: Are Groups More “Rational” Players? , 1998 .

[15]  W. Güth,et al.  An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining , 1982 .

[16]  J. Nash THE BARGAINING PROBLEM , 1950, Classics in Game Theory.

[17]  R. Thaler The Ultimatum Game , 1988 .

[18]  T. Stanley,et al.  Economics students need not be greedy: Fairness and the ultimatum game , 1998 .

[19]  Todd L. Cherry Mental Accounting and Other-Regarding Behavior: Evidence from the Lab , 2001 .

[20]  Paul Tompkinson,et al.  The ultimatum game and non-selfish utility functions , 1996 .

[21]  V. Smith,et al.  Preferences, Property Rights, and Anonymity in Bargaining Games , 1994 .

[22]  Bas C. van Fraassen,et al.  The Scientific Image , 1980 .

[23]  W. Güth On ultimatum bargaining experiments — A personal review , 1995 .

[24]  Colin F. Camerer,et al.  Outside Options and Social Comparison in Three-Player Ultimatum Game Experiments , 1995 .

[25]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias , 1991 .

[26]  M. Ridley The Origins of Virtue , 1996 .

[27]  Paul Tompkinson,et al.  The ultimatum game: raising the stakes , 1995 .

[28]  J. Horowitz,et al.  Fairness in Simple Bargaining Experiments , 1994 .

[29]  M. Deutsch Equity, Equality, and Need: What Determines Which Value Will Be Used as the Basis of Distributive Justice? , 1975 .

[30]  S. Huck Responder behavior in ultimatum offer games with incomplete information , 1999 .

[31]  Rachel Croson,et al.  Information in ultimatum games: An experimental study , 1996 .

[32]  M. Dufwenberg,et al.  Direct vs Indirect Reciprocity: An Experiment , 2000 .

[33]  David A. Kravitz,et al.  Decisions and perceptions of recipients in ultimatum bargaining games , 1992 .

[34]  Gary E. Bolton A Comparative Model of Bargaining: Theory and Evidence , 1991 .

[35]  L. Telser The Ultimatum Game and the Law of Demand , 1995 .

[36]  J. Henrich Does culture matter in economic behavior? Ultimatum game bargaining among the machiguenga , 2000 .

[37]  J. Shogren Fairness in bargaining requires a context: An experimental examination of loyalty , 1989 .

[38]  Ken Binmore,et al.  Learning to be imperfect: The ultimatum game , 1995 .

[39]  Amnon Rapoport,et al.  Ultimatums in two-person bargaining with one-sided uncertainty: Demand games , 1996 .

[40]  Catherine C. Eckel,et al.  The Relative Price of Fairness: Gender Differences in a Punishment Game , 1996 .

[41]  Werner Güth,et al.  From Ultimatum Bargaining to Dictatorship—an Experimental Study of Four Games Varying in Veto Power , 1997 .

[42]  D. Moore,et al.  Ultimatum Bargaining with a Group: Underestimating the Importance of the Decision Rule , 1997 .

[43]  H. Meyer Norms and self-interest in ultimatum bargaining: The prince's prudence , 1992 .

[44]  W. Güth,et al.  Ultimatum bargaining behavior : a survey and comparison of experimental results , 1990 .

[45]  R. Thaler,et al.  Anomalies: Ultimatums, Dictators and Manners , 1995 .

[46]  Marcel Zeelenberg,et al.  Emotions, Rejections, and Cooling off in the Ultimatum Game , 2001 .

[47]  A test for comparative income effects in an ultimatum bargaining experiment , 1996 .

[48]  J. Traupmann,et al.  Equity: Theory and Research , 1978 .

[49]  W. Hryniuk More is better. , 1988, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[50]  L. Thompson,et al.  Social Utility and Decision Making in Interpersonal Contexts , 1989 .

[51]  S. Zamir,et al.  Bargaining and Market Behavior in Jerusalem, Ljubljana, Pittsburgh, and Tokyo: An Experimental Study , 1991 .

[52]  C. Hauert,et al.  Reward and punishment , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[53]  Vernon L. Smith,et al.  On the failure to induce meager offers in ultimatum game , 1993 .

[54]  Terry L. Boles,et al.  Deception and Retribution in Repeated Ultimatum Bargaining. , 2000, Organizational behavior and human decision processes.

[55]  G. C. Homans,et al.  Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms. , 1975 .

[56]  E. Fehr A Theory of Fairness, Competition and Cooperation , 1998 .

[57]  George C. Homans,et al.  Social behavior: Its elementary forms, Revised ed. , 1974 .

[58]  A. Shaked,et al.  A further test of non-cooperative bargaining theory: reply , 1988 .

[59]  Jacob Cohen,et al.  THINGS I HAVE LEARNED (SO FAR) , 1990 .

[60]  J. Brehm A theory of psychological reactance. , 1981 .

[61]  Rami Zwick,et al.  What Price Fairness? A Bargaining Study , 1999 .

[62]  R. Nagel,et al.  Experimental results on ultimatum games with incomplete information , 1993 .

[63]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Experimental Tests of the Endowment Effect and the Coase Theorem , 1990, Journal of Political Economy.

[64]  Gary E. Bolton,et al.  Analyzing Ultimatum Bargaining: A Bayesian Approach to the Comparison of Two Potency Curves Under Shape Constraints , 1997 .

[65]  Jacob K. Goeree,et al.  Asymmetric inequality aversion and noisy behavior in alternating-offer bargaining games , 2000 .

[66]  Peter J. Carnevale,et al.  Group Choice in Ultimatum Bargaining , 1997 .

[67]  V. Smith,et al.  Social Distance and Other-Regarding Behavior in Dictator Games: Reply , 1999 .

[68]  H. Tajfel,et al.  Social categorization and intergroup behaviour , 1971 .

[69]  Daniel Kahneman,et al.  Fairness and the Assumptions of Economics , 1986 .

[70]  Reinhard Sel Ten THE EQUITY PRINCIPLE IN ECONOMIC BEHAVIOR , 1978 .

[71]  Hugo Sonnenschein,et al.  A Further Test of Noncooperative Bargaining Theory: Comment , 1988 .

[72]  Vernon L. Smith,et al.  Rational Choice: The Contrast between Economics and Psychology , 1991, Journal of Political Economy.

[73]  E. Dijk,et al.  Strategy and Fairness in Social Decision Making: Sometimes It Pays to Be Powerless ☆ ☆☆ , 2000 .

[74]  A. Tversky,et al.  Contingent weighting in judgment and choice , 1988 .

[75]  Donald V. Moser,et al.  Fairness in Ultimatum Games with Asymmetric Information and Asymmetric Payoffs , 1996 .

[76]  R. Thaler,et al.  Gambling with the house money and trying to break even: the effects of prior outcomes on risky choice , 1990 .

[77]  Madan M. Pillutla,et al.  BEING FAIR OR APPEARING FAIR: STRATEGIC BEHAVIOR IN ULTIMATUM BARGAINING , 1995 .

[78]  G. Owen,et al.  Two-person bargaining: An experimental test of the Nash axioms , 1974 .

[79]  Georg Kirchsteiger,et al.  The role of envy in ultimatum games , 1994 .

[80]  J. Keith Murnighan,et al.  Ultimatum bargaining by children and adults , 1998 .

[81]  J. Keith Murnighan,et al.  An experimental investigation of ultimatum games: information, fairness, expectations, and lowest acceptable offers , 1995 .

[82]  V. Smith,et al.  Social distance and other-regarding behavior in dictator games , 2000 .

[83]  Matthew L. Spitzer,et al.  The Coase Theorem: Some Experimental Tests , 1982, The Journal of Law and Economics.

[84]  Ramzi Suleiman,et al.  Expectations and fairness in a modified Ultimatum game , 1996 .

[85]  Gary E. Bolton,et al.  Anonymity versus Punishment in Ultimatum Bargaining , 1995 .

[86]  W. Güth,et al.  Two-Level Ultimatum Bargaining with Incomplete Information: An Experimental Study , 1996 .

[87]  A. Roth,et al.  An experimental study of sequential bargaining , 1998 .

[88]  Kevin McCabe,et al.  On expectations and the monetary stakes in ultimatum games , 1996 .

[89]  Amnon Rapoport,et al.  Ultimatums in two-person bargaining with one-sided uncertainty: Offer games , 1996 .

[90]  M. Rabin Published by: American , 2022 .

[91]  E. Fehr,et al.  Reciprocity and economics: The economic implications of Homo Reciprocans 1 This paper is part of a r , 1998 .

[92]  David M. Messick,et al.  Equality as a decision heuristic. , 1993 .

[93]  G. W. Walster,et al.  New directions in equity research. , 1973 .

[94]  Gary E. Bolton,et al.  ERC: A Theory of Equity, Reciprocity, and Competition , 2000 .

[95]  Steffen Huck,et al.  The Indirect Evolutionary Approach to Explaining Fair Allocations , 1999 .

[96]  Amnon Rapoport,et al.  Intergroup Competition for the Provision of Binary Public Goods , 1987 .

[97]  Hugo Sonnenschein,et al.  Understanding When Agents Are Fairmen or Gamesmen , 1994 .

[98]  Gary E. Bolton The rationality of splitting equally , 1997 .

[99]  Mark V. Pezzo,et al.  The Psychology of Windfall Gains , 1994 .

[100]  R. Axelrod An Evolutionary Approach to Norms , 1986, American Political Science Review.

[101]  R. Hertwig,et al.  Experimental practices in economics: A methodological challenge for psychologists? , 2001, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[102]  Ken Binmore,et al.  Do People Exploit Their Bargaining Power? An Experimental Study* , 1991 .

[103]  J. R. Carter,et al.  Are Economists Different, and If So, Why? , 1991 .

[104]  M. Dufwenberg,et al.  Direct versus indirect reciprocity : An experiment , 2001 .

[105]  E. Rowland Theory of Games and Economic Behavior , 1946, Nature.

[106]  Chester A. Insko,et al.  The Discontinuity Effect in Interpersonal and Intergroup Relations: Generality and Mediation , 1992 .

[107]  A. Roth,et al.  Considerations of Fairness and Strategy: Experimental Data from Sequential Games , 1992 .

[108]  Werner Güth,et al.  The Relevance of Equal Splits in Ultimatum Games , 2001, Games Econ. Behav..

[109]  A. Roth,et al.  Game-Theoretic Models and the Role of Information in Bargaining , 1979 .

[110]  Kevin McCabe,et al.  The Impact of Exchange Context on the Activation of Equity in Ultimatum Games , 2000 .

[111]  Jon Elster,et al.  The Cement Of Society , 1991 .

[112]  John A. List,et al.  Learning to Accept in Ultimatum Games: Evidence from an Experimental Design that Generates Low Offers , 2000 .

[113]  Joakim Sonnegård Determination of first movers in sequential bargaining games: An experimental study , 1996 .

[114]  Werner Güth,et al.  Ultimatum Bargaining for a Shrinking Cake — An Experimental Analysis — , 1988 .