IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/gbusec/v9y2007i2-3p183-201.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Examining the impact of relative standing using an ultimatum bargaining game experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Muqun Li
  • Mark Pingle

Abstract

This paper presents the results of an experiment designed to examine the extent to which a decision-maker's relative standing affects bargaining behaviour. In each session, 14 participants played a series of one-shot ultimatum bargaining games. In one treatment, the participants were made aware of only their own cumulative outcome rank as they started each new game, while in a second treatment both their own rank and the rank of their bargaining partner was known. The results indicate relative standing does affect bargaining behaviour, particularly when the decision-maker knows both his own rank and the rank of the bargaining partner. A primary finding is that the provision of relative standing information can enhance well-being because it promotes the formation of mutually beneficial bargaining agreements.

Suggested Citation

  • Muqun Li & Mark Pingle, 2007. "Examining the impact of relative standing using an ultimatum bargaining game experiment," Global Business and Economics Review, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 9(2/3), pages 183-201.
  • Handle: RePEc:ids:gbusec:v:9:y:2007:i:2/3:p:183-201
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=13700
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Greiner, Ben & Ockenfels, Axel & Werner, Peter, 2012. "The dynamic interplay of inequality and trust—An experimental study," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 355-365.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ids:gbusec:v:9:y:2007:i:2/3:p:183-201. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=168 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.