IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ecinqu/v37y1999i2p258-81.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Information Sharing and Tacit Collusion in Laboratory Duopoly Markets

Author

Listed:
  • Cason, Timothy N
  • Mason, Charles F

Abstract

This paper reports forty-five laboratory duopoly markets that examine the importance of information sharing in facilitating tacit collusion under conditions of demand uncertainty. Sellers in these repeated laboratory markets generally shared information when possible to reduce their demand uncertainty, which led to output reductions in some demand states. Risk aversion is a likely explanation for this sharing but some sellers also appeared to employ a strategy of information concealment to punish noncolluding rivals. Nevertheless, output choices were similar in control treatments that forced sellers to share or conceal information, so the information sharing itself did not substantially increase tacit collusion. Copyright 1999 by Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Cason, Timothy N & Mason, Charles F, 1999. "Information Sharing and Tacit Collusion in Laboratory Duopoly Markets," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 37(2), pages 258-281, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ecinqu:v:37:y:1999:i:2:p:258-81
    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. Suetens, Sigrid, 2008. "Does R&D cooperation facilitate price collusion? An experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 66(3-4), pages 822-836, June.
    2. Jérôme Dollinger & Ana Mauleon & Vincent Vannetelbosch, 2024. "R &d and market sharing agreements," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 78(3), pages 877-922, November.
    3. Chang, Chun-Hao & Prakash, Arun J. & Yeh, Shu, 2004. "Sale of monopoly information and behavior of rivaling clients: A theoretical perspective," Review of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 283-304.
    4. Hemant Bhargava & Antoine Dubus & David Ronayne & Shiva Shekhar, 2024. "The Strategic Value of Data Sharing in Interdependent Markets," CESifo Working Paper Series 10963, CESifo.
    5. Timothy L. Sorenson, 2002. "Theory And Practice In The Classroom: A Repeated Game Of Multimarket Oligopoly," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 20(3), pages 316-329, July.
    6. Robert Feinberg & Christopher Snyder, 2002. "Collusion with secret price cuts: an experimental investigation," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 3(6), pages 1-11.
    7. Chun‐Hao Chang & Arun J. Prakash & Shu Yeh, 2004. "Sale of monopoly information and behavior of rivaling clients: A theoretical perspective," Review of Financial Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(3), pages 283-304.
    8. Kubler, Dorothea & Muller, Wieland, 2002. "Simultaneous and sequential price competition in heterogeneous duopoly markets: experimental evidence," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 20(10), pages 1437-1460, December.
    9. Liliane Karlinger, 2008. "How Demand Information Can Destabilize a Cartel," Vienna Economics Papers 0803, University of Vienna, Department of Economics.
    10. Liliane Karlinger, 2008. "How Demand Information Can Destabilize a Cartel," Vienna Economics Papers vie0803, University of Vienna, Department of Economics.
    11. Dechenaux, Emmanuel & Mago, Shakun D., 2019. "Communication and side payments in a duopoly with private costs: An experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 157-184.
    12. Till Requate & Israel Waichman, 2011. "“A profit table or a profit calculator?” A note on the design of Cournot oligopoly experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 14(1), pages 36-46, March.
    13. Charles F. Mason & Owen R. Phillips, 2002. "In Support of Trigger Strategies: Experimental Evidence from Two‐Person Noncooperative Games," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(4), pages 685-716, December.
    14. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:3:y:2002:i:6:p:1-11 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Krämer Jan & Vogelsang Ingo, 2016. "Co-Investments and Tacit Collusion in Regulated Network Industries: Experimental Evidence," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 15(1), pages 35-61, March.
    16. David Kopanyi & Anita Kopanyi-Peuker, 2015. "Endogenous information disclosure in experimental oligopolies," Discussion Papers 2015-11, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    17. Kazunori Miwa, 2021. "An Experimental Study on Information Acquisition and Disclosure in a Cournot Duopoly Market," Discussion Papers in Economics and Business 13-01-Rev, Osaka University, Graduate School of Economics.
    18. John A. List, 2009. "The Economics of Open Air Markets," NBER Working Papers 15420, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Eddy Cardinaels & Filip Roodhooft & Luk Warlop & Gustaaf Van Herck, 2008. "Competitive Pricing in Markets with Different Overhead Costs: Concealment or Leakage of Cost Information?," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(4), pages 761-784, September.
    20. Kazunori Miwa, 2013. "The Impact of Mandatory Disclosure on Information Acquisition: Theory and Experiment," Discussion Papers in Economics and Business 13-01, Osaka University, Graduate School of Economics.

    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:oup:ecinqu:v:37:y:1999:i:2:p:258-81. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/weaaaea.html .

    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.