IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/pubcho/v40y1983i3p281-291.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Some experimental results that fail to support the competitive solution

Author

Listed:
  • Richard McKelvey
  • Peter Ordeshook

Abstract

Over a variety of experimental designs, including vote trading games and committee games with both spatial and finite alternatives, the Competitive Solution has received considerable support. But the experiments that we report here do not replicate that support. Hence, while we maintain our earlier conclusion that neither the V-set nor the bargaining set is an acceptable solution hypothesis, we must now modify considerably our previous enthusiasm for K. In particular, we must now conclude, as we did earlier with V and M 1 , that the initial strong support that K receives can be attributed to the particular choice of ordinal and cardinal preferences, and to K's correspondence in those experiments to some more general hypothesis. And, while we remain uncertain as to the form of that hypothesis, we are convinced nevertheless that such an hypothesis exists. Presently, we are unable to conjecture about the form of those hypotheses. The sensitivity of outcomes to cardinal preferences suggests that the several solution theories reviewed do not take adequate account of subjectively perceived lotteries, which may require a more thorough extensive game-form representation for their analysis. Indeed, while we argue elsewhere that the characteristic function form representation used here is adequate only for simple games (McKelvey and Ordeshook, 1982), we may find experimentally that such a representation remains inadequate for all classes of games. Our experiments reveal understandable patterns but our understanding of an explanation for those patterns now is ex post rather than ex ante. Copyright Martinus Nijhoff Publishers 1983

Suggested Citation

  • Richard McKelvey & Peter Ordeshook, 1983. "Some experimental results that fail to support the competitive solution," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 281-291, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:40:y:1983:i:3:p:281-291
    DOI: 10.1007/BF00114524
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/BF00114524
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/BF00114524?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Natalia Jiménez & Ángel Solano-García, 2015. "Elected Officials’ Opportunistic Behavior on Third-Party Punishment: An Experimental Analysis," Working Papers. Serie EC 2015-04, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
    2. Herrade Igersheim & Antoinette Baujard & Jean-François Laslier, 2016. "La question du vote. Expérimentations en laboratoire et In Situ," Working Papers halshs-01402275, HAL.
    3. Igerseim, Herrade & Baujard, Antoinette & Laslier, Jean-François, 2016. "La question du vote. Expérimentations en laboratoire et In Situ," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 92(1-2), pages 151-189, Mars-Juin.
    4. Cheryl L. Eavey, 1991. "Patterns of Distribution in Spatial Games," Rationality and Society, , vol. 3(4), pages 450-474, October.
    5. repec:hal:pseose:halshs-01136390 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:kap:pubcho:v:40:y:1983:i:3:p:281-291. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.