IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/pubcho/v74y1992i2p191-205.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Favorites and Underdogs: Strategic Behavior in an Experimental Contest

Author

Listed:
  • Shogren, Jason F
  • Baik, Kyung H

Abstract

Conflicts between favorites and underdogs are everyday phenomena. The authors examine their strategic behavior in an experimental contest and find behavior partially consistent with predictions. Favorites given a first-mover advantage do overcommit effort relative to Nash. Underdogs often select the best response effort level given the favorite's move. Overall dissipation of the prize was significantly higher with the strategic commitment relative to Nash. Copyright 1992 by Kluwer Academic Publishers

Suggested Citation

  • Shogren, Jason F & Baik, Kyung H, 1992. "Favorites and Underdogs: Strategic Behavior in an Experimental Contest," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 74(2), pages 191-205, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:74:y:1992:i:2:p:191-205
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Andrzej Kwiatkowski, 2010. "Affirmative Action Policy and Effort Levels. Sequential-Move Contest Game Argument," Dundee Discussion Papers in Economics 242, Economic Studies, University of Dundee.
    2. Hörtnagl, Tanja & Kerschbamer, Rudolf & Stracke, Rudi, 2019. "Competing for market shares: Does the order of moves matter even when it shouldn’t?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 346-365.
    3. Jason Shogren & Thomas Crocker, 1991. "Cooperative and noncooperative protection against transferable and filterable externalities," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 1(2), pages 195-214, June.
    4. Emmanuel Dechenaux & Dan Kovenock & Roman Sheremeta, 2015. "A survey of experimental research on contests, all-pay auctions and tournaments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(4), pages 609-669, December.
    5. Holt, Todd Sanders, 1992. "Timing theory in contests with experimental evidence," ISU General Staff Papers 1992010108000017574, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    6. Emmanuel Dechenaux & Shakun D. Mago, 2023. "Contests with revisions," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 26(4), pages 915-954, September.
    7. Shaffer, Sherrill & Shogren, Jason F., 2009. "Repeated contests: A general parameterization," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 105(2), pages 159-161, November.
    8. Stracke, Rudi & Hörtnagl, Tanja & Kerschbamer, Rudolf, 2016. "Competing for Market Shares: Why the Order of Moves Matters Even When It Shouldn't," VfS Annual Conference 2016 (Augsburg): Demographic Change 145532, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    9. Kyung Hwan Baik & Shogren, Jason F., 1995. "Contests with spying," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 441-451, September.
    10. Sheremeta, Roman, 2018. "Experimental Research on Contests," MPRA Paper 89327, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Martin Kolmar & Andreas Wagener, 2010. "Inefficient Group Organization as Optimal Adaption to Dominant Environments," CESifo Working Paper Series 3157, CESifo.
    12. Kyung Hwan Baik & Todd Cherry & Stephan Kroll & Jason Shogren, 1999. "Endogenous Timing in a Gaming Tournament," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 1-21, August.
    13. Sherrill Shaffer & Jason Shogren, 2008. "Infinitely repeated contests: How strategic interaction affects the efficiency of governance," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(2), pages 234-252, June.

    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:74:y:1992:i:2:p:191-205. 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.