IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/e/pki23.html
   My authors  Follow this author

Özgür Kıbrıs
(Ozgur Kibris)

Personal Details

First Name:Ozgur
Middle Name:
Last Name:Kibris
Suffix:
RePEc Short-ID:pki23
[This author has chosen not to make the email address public]
http://myweb.sabanciuniv.edu/ozgur/
Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences Sabanci University Orhanli 81474 Tuzla Istanbul Turkey
+90 216 483 9267
Terminal Degree:2000 Economics Department; University of Rochester (from RePEc Genealogy)

Affiliation

Ekonomi Grubu
Sabancı Üniversitesi

İstanbul, Turkey
http://www.sabanciuniv.edu/ssbf/economics/
RePEc:edi:egsabtr (more details at EDIRC)

Research output

as
Jump to: Working papers Articles

Working papers

  1. Mustafa Oguz Afacan & Nejat Anbarci & Ozgur Kıbrıs, 2022. "Arbiter Assignment," Department of Economics Working Papers 2022_02, Durham University, Department of Economics.
  2. Kibris, Ozgur & Kucuksenel, Serkan, 2005. "Trade rules for uncleared markets," Working Papers 1232, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
  3. KIBRIS, Özgür, 2002. "Misrepresentation of utilities in bargaining: pure exchange and public good economies," LIDAM Reprints CORE 1546, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
  4. Hokari, T. & Kibris, Ö., 2001. "Consistency, converse consistency, and aspirations in coalitional games," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2001030, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
  5. Arzu Ilhan & Ozgur Kibris, 2000. "Protectionist demands in globalization," Working Papers (Old Series) 0006, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland.

Articles

  1. Cinar, Asli Ceren & Kıbrıs, Özgür, 2024. "Persistence of voice pitch bias against policy differences," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(3), pages 591-605, July.
  2. Özgür Kıbrıs & Yusufcan Masatlioglu & Elchin Suleymanov, 2023. "A theory of reference point formation," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 75(1), pages 137-166, January.
  3. Kocak, Korhan & Kıbrıs, Özgür, 2023. "Social Media and Press Freedom," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 53(1), pages 140-162, January.
  4. Arzu Kıbrıs & Özgür Kıbrıs & Mehmet Yiğit Gürdal, 2022. "Protectionist demands in globalization," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 26(3), pages 345-365, September.
  5. Büyükboyacı, Mürüvvet & Gürdal, Mehmet Y. & Kıbrıs, Arzu & Kıbrıs, Özgür, 2019. "An experimental study of the investment implications of bankruptcy laws," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 607-629.
  6. Dean, Mark & Kıbrıs, Özgür & Masatlioglu, Yusufcan, 2017. "Limited attention and status quo bias," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 93-127.
  7. Özgür Kıbrıs & Arzu Kıbrıs, 2016. "On surplus-sharing in partnerships," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(1), pages 89-111, June.
  8. Kıbrıs Arzu & Kıbrıs Özgür, 2016. "On the Dynamics of Extremist Violence," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 22(1), pages 1-25, January.
  9. Özgür Kıbrıs & İpek Tapkı, 2014. "A mechanism design approach to allocating central government funds among regional development agencies," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 18(3), pages 163-189, September.
  10. Kıbrıs, Özgür & Kıbrıs, Arzu, 2013. "On the investment implications of bankruptcy laws," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 85-99.
  11. Özgür Kıbrıs, 2013. "On recursive solutions to simple allocation problems," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 75(3), pages 449-463, September.
  12. Özgür Kıbrıs, 2012. "Nash bargaining in ordinal environments," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 16(4), pages 269-282, December.
  13. Özgür Kıbrıs, 2012. "A revealed preference analysis of solutions to simple allocation problems," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 72(4), pages 509-523, April.
  14. Kıbrıs, Özgür & Tapkı, İpek Gürsel, 2011. "Bargaining with nonanonymous disagreement: Decomposable rules," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 62(3), pages 151-161.
  15. KIbrIs, Özgür & TapkI, Ipek Gürsel, 2010. "Bargaining with nonanonymous disagreement: Monotonic rules," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 233-241, January.
  16. Özgür Kıbrıs & Serkan Küçükşenel, 2009. "Uniform trade rules for uncleared markets," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 32(1), pages 101-121, January.
  17. Anirban Kar & Özgür Kıbrıs, 2008. "Allocating multiple estates among agents with single-peaked preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 31(4), pages 641-666, December.
  18. Özgür Kıbrıs & Murat Sertel, 2007. "Bargaining over a finite set of alternatives," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 28(3), pages 421-437, April.
  19. Kibris, Ozgur, 2004. "Ordinal invariance in multicoalitional bargaining," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 76-87, January.
  20. Kibris, Ozgur, 2004. "Egalitarianism in ordinal bargaining: the Shapley-Shubik rule," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 157-170, October.
  21. Bart Taub & Özgür Kibris, 2004. "Bargaining power in stationary parallelogram games," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 8(4), pages 449-464, April.
  22. Özgür Kıbrıs, 2003. "Constrained allocation problems with single-peaked preferences: An axiomatic analysis," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 20(3), pages 353-362, June.
  23. Hokari, Toru & Kibris, Ozgur, 2003. "Consistency, converse consistency, and aspirations in TU-games," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 313-331, July.
  24. Kibris, Ozgur, 2002. "Misrepresentation of Utilities in Bargaining: Pure Exchange and Public Good Economies," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 91-110, April.

Citations

Many of the citations below have been collected in an experimental project, CitEc, where a more detailed citation analysis can be found. These are citations from works listed in RePEc that could be analyzed mechanically. So far, only a minority of all works could be analyzed. See under "Corrections" how you can help improve the citation analysis.

Working papers

  1. Kibris, Ozgur & Kucuksenel, Serkan, 2005. "Trade rules for uncleared markets," Working Papers 1232, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.

    Cited by:

    1. World Bank, 2009. "Land Reform, Rural Development, and Poverty in the Philippines : Revisiting the Agenda," World Bank Publications - Reports 18545, The World Bank Group.
    2. Kokko, Ari & Gustavsson Tingvall, Patrik & Videnord, Josefin, 2017. "Which Antidumping Cases Reach the WTO?," Ratio Working Papers 286, The Ratio Institute.
    3. Mennicken, Andrea, 2010. "From inspection to auditing: Audit and markets as linked ecologies," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 334-359, April.
    4. Priebe, Stefan & Bogic, Marija & Ashcroft, Richard & Franciskovic, Tanja & Galeazzi, Gian Maria & Kucukalic, Abdulah & Lecic-Tosevski, Dusica & Morina, Nexhmedin & Popovski, Mihajlo & Roughton, Michae, 2010. "Experience of human rights violations and subsequent mental disorders - A study following the war in the Balkans," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(12), pages 2170-2177, December.

  2. KIBRIS, Özgür, 2002. "Misrepresentation of utilities in bargaining: pure exchange and public good economies," LIDAM Reprints CORE 1546, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).

    Cited by:

    1. Velez, Rodrigo A., 2011. "Are incentives against economic justice?," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 146(1), pages 326-345, January.
    2. Fujinaka, Yuji & Wakayama, Takuma, 2015. "Maximal manipulation of envy-free solutions in economies with indivisible goods and money," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 158(PA), pages 165-185.
    3. Gomez, Juan Camilo, 2006. "Achieving efficiency with manipulative bargainers," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 254-263, November.
    4. Velez, Rodrigo A. & Thomson, William, 2012. "Let them cheat!," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 948-963.

  3. Arzu Ilhan & Ozgur Kibris, 2000. "Protectionist demands in globalization," Working Papers (Old Series) 0006, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland.

    Cited by:

    1. Serkan Kucuksenel & Osman Gulseven, 2020. "Electoral systems and international trade policy," Papers 2003.05725, arXiv.org.

Articles

  1. Özgür Kıbrıs & Yusufcan Masatlioglu & Elchin Suleymanov, 2023. "A theory of reference point formation," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 75(1), pages 137-166, January.

    Cited by:

    1. Karagözoğlu, Emin & Keskin, Kerim, 2024. "Consideration sets and reference points in a dynamic bargaining game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 219(C), pages 381-403.
    2. Matthew Kovach & Elchin Suleymanov, 2021. "Reference Dependence and Random Attention," Papers 2106.13350, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2023.

  2. Kocak, Korhan & Kıbrıs, Özgür, 2023. "Social Media and Press Freedom," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 53(1), pages 140-162, January.

    Cited by:

    1. Oshan Uluşan & İbrahim Özejder, 2024. "Faking the war: fake posts on Turkish social media during the Russia–Ukraine war," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-14, December.

  3. Arzu Kıbrıs & Özgür Kıbrıs & Mehmet Yiğit Gürdal, 2022. "Protectionist demands in globalization," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 26(3), pages 345-365, September.
    See citations under working paper version above.
  4. Büyükboyacı, Mürüvvet & Gürdal, Mehmet Y. & Kıbrıs, Arzu & Kıbrıs, Özgür, 2019. "An experimental study of the investment implications of bankruptcy laws," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 607-629.

    Cited by:

    1. Jonathan H.W. Tan & Zhao Zichen & Daniel John Zizzo, 2023. "Scientific Inference from Field and Laboratory Economic Experiments: Empirical Evidence," Discussion Papers Series 663, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    2. José-Manuel Giménez-Gómez & M. Carmen Marco-Gil & Juan-Francisco Sánchez-García, 2022. "New empirical insights into conflicting claims problems," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 13(4), pages 709-738, December.

  5. Dean, Mark & Kıbrıs, Özgür & Masatlioglu, Yusufcan, 2017. "Limited attention and status quo bias," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 93-127.

    Cited by:

    1. Wolfgang Habla & Paul Muller, 2021. "Experimental evidence of limited attention at the gym," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(4), pages 1156-1184, December.
    2. Raphael Brade & Oliver Himmler & Robert Jaeckle & Philipp Weinschenk, 2024. "Helping Students to Succeed – The Long-Term Effects of Soft Commitments and Reminders," CESifo Working Paper Series 11001, CESifo.
    3. Corgnet, Brice & Gächter, Simon & González, Roberto Hernán, 2020. "Working Too Much for Too Little: Stochastic Rewards Cause Work Addiction," IZA Discussion Papers 12992, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Yuta Inoue & Koji Shirai, 2018. "Limited consideration and limited data: revealed preference tests and observable restrictions," Discussion Paper Series 176, School of Economics, Kwansei Gakuin University, revised Mar 2018.
    5. Kupor, Daniella & Reich, Taly & Laurin, Kristin, 2018. "The (bounded) benefits of correction: The unanticipated interpersonal advantages of making and correcting mistakes," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 165-178.
    6. Yusufcan Masatlioglu & Elchin Suleymanov, 2021. "Decision making within a product network," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 71(1), pages 185-209, February.
    7. Miguel Costa-Gomes & Georgios Gerasimou, 2020. "Status Quo Bias and the Decoy Effect: A Comparative Analysis in Choice under Risk," Papers 2006.14868, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2021.
    8. Gerasimou, Georgios & Papi, Mauro, 2015. "Oligopolistic Competition with Choice-Overloaded Consumers," MPRA Paper 68509, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Varun Bansal, 2024. "Random Attention and Unobserved Reference Alternatives," Papers 2407.01528, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2024.
    10. Fabrice Le Lec & Marianne Lumeau & Benoît Tarroux, 2021. "How choice proliferation affects revealed preferences," Post-Print hal-03421574, HAL.
    11. Furtado, Bruno A. & Nascimento, Leandro & Riella, Gil, 2023. "Rational choice with full-comparability domains," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 216(C), pages 124-135.
    12. Laurent Bouton & Aniol Llorente-Saguer & Frédéric Malherbe, 2016. "Unanimous Rules in the Laboratory," NBER Working Papers 21943, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Yuta Inoue & Koji Shirai, 2018. "Limited consideration and limited data: revealed preference tests and observable restrictions," Discussion Paper Series 176-2, School of Economics, Kwansei Gakuin University, revised Aug 2019.
    14. Guy Barokas, 2021. "Dynamic choice under familiarity-based attention," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 57(4), pages 703-720, November.
    15. Andrew Ellis & Yusufcan Masatlioglu, 2020. "Choice with Endogenous Categorization," Papers 2005.05196, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2021.
    16. Maniquet, François & Nosratabadi, Hassan, 2022. "Welfare analysis when choice is status-quo biased," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    17. Malodia, Suresh & Kaur, Puneet & Ractham, Peter & Sakashita, Mototaka & Dhir, Amandeep, 2022. "Why do people avoid and postpone the use of voice assistants for transactional purposes? A perspective from decision avoidance theory," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 605-618.
    18. Muller, Paul & Habla, Wolfgang, 2018. "Experimental and non-experimental evidence on limited attention and present bias at the gym," ZEW Discussion Papers 18-041, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    19. Yuta Inoue & Koji Shirai, 2023. "On the observable restrictions of limited consideration models: theory and application," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 75(3), pages 695-715, April.
    20. Özgür Kıbrıs & Yusufcan Masatlioglu & Elchin Suleymanov, 2023. "A theory of reference point formation," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 75(1), pages 137-166, January.
    21. Yuta Inoue & Koji Shirai, 2020. "On the observable restrictions of limited consideration models: theory and application," Discussion Paper Series 217, School of Economics, Kwansei Gakuin University.
    22. Essl, Andrea & Steffen, Angela & Staehle, Martin, 2021. "Choose to reuse! The effect of action-close reminders on pro-environmental behavior," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    23. Jae-Do Song & Young-Hwan Ahn, 2019. "Cognitive Bias in Emissions Trading," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-13, March.
    24. Matthew Kovach & Elchin Suleymanov, 2021. "Reference Dependence and Random Attention," Papers 2106.13350, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2023.
    25. Yazdanabad, Hadi Pahlevan, 2024. "Justification within and between social contexts with the possibility of choice deferral," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    26. Chadd, Ian, 2023. "Random network consideration: Theory and experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 251-269.
    27. Leković Milјan, 2020. "Cognitive Biases as an Integral Part of Behavioral Finance," Economic Themes, Sciendo, vol. 58(1), pages 75-96, March.
    28. Mihm, Maximilian & Ozbek, Kemal, 2018. "Mood-driven choices and self-regulation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 727-760.
    29. Haile, Kaleab K. & Tirivayi, Nyasha & Tesfaye, Wondimagegn, 2019. "Farmers’ willingness to accept payments for ecosystem services on agricultural land: The case of climate-smart agroforestry in Ethiopia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    30. Atasoy, Ayse Tugba & Madlener, Reinhard, 2020. "Default vs. Active Choices: An Experiment on Electricity Tariff Switching," FCN Working Papers 7/2020, E.ON Energy Research Center, Future Energy Consumer Needs and Behavior (FCN).
    31. Qin, Dan, 2021. "Exclusive shortlisting choice with reference," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    32. Kovach, Matthew, 2020. "Twisting the truth: foundations of wishful thinking," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 15(3), July.
    33. Gerasimou, Georgios & Papi, Mauro, 2018. "Duopolistic competition with choice-overloaded consumers," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 330-353.
    34. Gleb Koshevoy & Ernesto Savaglio, 2017. "Enveloped choice functions and path-independent rationality," Department of Economics University of Siena 765, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    35. Xi Zhi Lim, 2021. "Ordered Reference Dependent Choice," Papers 2105.12915, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2024.
    36. Li, Boyao, 2023. "Random utility models with status quo bias," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    37. Xiaosheng Mu, 2021. "Sequential Choice with Incomplete Preferences," Working Papers 2021-35, Princeton University. Economics Department..

  6. Kıbrıs, Özgür & Kıbrıs, Arzu, 2013. "On the investment implications of bankruptcy laws," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 85-99.

    Cited by:

    1. Karagozoglu, E., 2010. "A noncooperative approach to bankruptcy problems with an endogenous estate," Research Memorandum 027, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    2. Thomson, William, 2015. "Axiomatic and game-theoretic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: An update," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 41-59.
    3. Calleja, Pedro & Llerena, Francesc, 2024. "Proportional clearing mechanisms in financial systems: An axiomatic approach," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    4. Koster, Maurice & Boonen, Tim J., 2019. "Constrained stochastic cost allocation," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 20-30.
    5. Boonen, Tim J., 2019. "Equilibrium recoveries in insurance markets with limited liability," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 38-45.
    6. Schumacher, Johannes M., 2021. "Ex-ante estate division under strong Pareto efficiency," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 10-24.

  7. Özgür Kıbrıs, 2013. "On recursive solutions to simple allocation problems," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 75(3), pages 449-463, September.

    Cited by:

    1. Thomson, William, 2015. "Axiomatic and game-theoretic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: An update," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 41-59.
    2. Stovall, John E., 2020. "Equal sacrifice taxation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 55-75.
    3. Patrick Harless, 2017. "Endowment additivity and the weighted proportional rules for adjudicating conflicting claims," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 63(3), pages 755-781, March.
    4. Jingyi Xue, 2018. "Fair division with uncertain needs," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 51(1), pages 105-136, June.
    5. Flores-Szwagrzak, Karol, 2015. "Priority classes and weighted constrained equal awards rules for the claims problem," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 36-55.
    6. Stovall, John E., 2014. "Collective rationality and monotone path division rules," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 1-24.

  8. Özgür Kıbrıs, 2012. "Nash bargaining in ordinal environments," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 16(4), pages 269-282, December.

    Cited by:

    1. William Thomson, 2022. "On the axiomatic theory of bargaining: a survey of recent results," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 26(4), pages 491-542, December.
    2. Vidal-Puga, Juan, 2013. "A non-cooperative approach to the ordinal Shapley rule," MPRA Paper 43790, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Vidal-Puga, Juan, 2015. "A non-cooperative approach to the ordinal Shapley–Shubik rule," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 111-118.

  9. Özgür Kıbrıs, 2012. "A revealed preference analysis of solutions to simple allocation problems," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 72(4), pages 509-523, April.

    Cited by:

    1. Thomson, William, 2015. "Axiomatic and game-theoretic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: An update," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 41-59.
    2. Stovall, John E., 2020. "Equal sacrifice taxation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 55-75.
    3. Patrick Harless, 2017. "Endowment additivity and the weighted proportional rules for adjudicating conflicting claims," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 63(3), pages 755-781, March.
    4. Jingyi Xue, 2018. "Fair division with uncertain needs," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 51(1), pages 105-136, June.
    5. Flores-Szwagrzak, Karol, 2015. "Priority classes and weighted constrained equal awards rules for the claims problem," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 36-55.
    6. Bossert, Walter & Peters, Hans, 2017. "Choice on the simplex domain," Research Memorandum 030, Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).
    7. , P. & ,, 2014. "On the consistency of data with bargaining theories," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 9(1), January.
    8. Stovall, John E., 2014. "Collective rationality and monotone path division rules," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 1-24.
    9. Schumacher, Johannes M., 2021. "Ex-ante estate division under strong Pareto efficiency," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 10-24.

  10. Kıbrıs, Özgür & Tapkı, İpek Gürsel, 2011. "Bargaining with nonanonymous disagreement: Decomposable rules," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 62(3), pages 151-161.

    Cited by:

    1. William Thomson, 2022. "On the axiomatic theory of bargaining: a survey of recent results," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 26(4), pages 491-542, December.

  11. KIbrIs, Özgür & TapkI, Ipek Gürsel, 2010. "Bargaining with nonanonymous disagreement: Monotonic rules," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 233-241, January.

    Cited by:

    1. Kawamori, Tomohiko & Miyakawa, Toshiji, 2016. "Nash bargaining solution under externalities," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 1-7.
    2. Kıbrıs, Özgür & Tapkı, İpek Gürsel, 2011. "Bargaining with nonanonymous disagreement: Decomposable rules," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 62(3), pages 151-161.

  12. Özgür Kıbrıs & Serkan Küçükşenel, 2009. "Uniform trade rules for uncleared markets," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 32(1), pages 101-121, January.

    Cited by:

    1. Karol Flores-Szwagrzak, 2017. "Efficient, fair, and strategy-proof (re)allocation under network constraints," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(1), pages 109-131, January.
    2. Szwagrzak, Karol, 2014. "Strategy-proof market clearing mechanisms," Discussion Papers on Economics 4/2014, University of Southern Denmark, Department of Economics.
    3. Karol Flores-Szwagrzak, 2016. "The replacement principle in networked economies with single-peaked preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(4), pages 763-789, December.

  13. Anirban Kar & Özgür Kıbrıs, 2008. "Allocating multiple estates among agents with single-peaked preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 31(4), pages 641-666, December.

    Cited by:

    1. Massó, Jordi & Moreno de Barreda, Inés, 2011. "On strategy-proofness and symmetric single-peakedness," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 467-484, June.
    2. Gustavo Bergantiños & Jordi Massó & Inés Moreno de Barreda & Alejandro Neme, 2015. "Stable partitions in many division problems: the proportional and the sequential dictator solutions," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 79(2), pages 227-250, September.
    3. Rahmi Ilkilic, 2012. "Allocation rules on networks," Documentos de Trabajo 9380, Universidad del Rosario.
    4. Bochet, Olivier & İlkılıç, Rahmi & Moulin, Hervé, 2013. "Egalitarianism under earmark constraints," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(2), pages 535-562.
    5. William Thomson, 2010. "Implementation of solutions to the problem of fair division when preferences are single-peaked," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 14(1), pages 1-15, March.

  14. Özgür Kıbrıs & Murat Sertel, 2007. "Bargaining over a finite set of alternatives," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 28(3), pages 421-437, April.

    Cited by:

    1. Fabio Galeotti & Maria Montero & Anders Poulsen, 2018. "The Attraction and Compromise Effects in Bargaining: Experimental Evidence," Post-Print halshs-01820223, HAL.
    2. Matías Núñez & M. Remzi Sanver, 2021. "On the subgame perfect implementability of voting rules," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 56(2), pages 421-441, February.
    3. Geoffroy de Clippel & Kfir Eliaz & Brian Knight, 2012. "On the Selection of Arbitrators," Working Papers 2012-8, Brown University, Department of Economics.
    4. Matias Nunez & Jean-Francois Laslier, 2014. "Bargaining through Approval," THEMA Working Papers 2014-06, THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise.
    5. , & ,, 2012. "Reason-based choice: a bargaining rationale for the attraction and compromise effects," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 7(1), January.
    6. David H. Wolpert & James Bono, 2010. "A theory of unstructured bargaining using distribution-valued solution concepts," Working Papers 2010-14, American University, Department of Economics.
    7. Felix Brandt & Paul Harrenstein, 2010. "Characterization of dominance relations in finite coalitional games," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 69(2), pages 233-256, August.
    8. Salvador Barberà & Danilo Coelho, 2022. "Compromising on compromise rules," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 53(1), pages 95-112, March.
    9. Chatterji, Shurojit & Zeng, Huaxia, 2019. "Random mechanism design on multidimensional domains," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 25-105.
    10. Damien Bol & Jean-François Laslier & Matías Núñez, 2022. "Two Person Bargaining Mechanisms: A Laboratory Experiment," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 31(6), pages 1145-1177, December.
    11. John Conley & Simon Wilkie, 2012. "The ordinal egalitarian bargaining solution for finite choice sets," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 38(1), pages 23-42, January.
    12. Mustafa Oguz Afacan & Nejat Anbarci & Ozgur Kıbrıs, 2022. "Arbiter Assignment," Department of Economics Working Papers 2022_02, Durham University, Department of Economics.

  15. Kibris, Ozgur, 2004. "Ordinal invariance in multicoalitional bargaining," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 76-87, January.

    Cited by:

    1. Kibris, Ozgur, 2004. "Egalitarianism in ordinal bargaining: the Shapley-Shubik rule," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 157-170, October.
    2. Vidal-Puga, Juan, 2013. "A non-cooperative approach to the ordinal Shapley rule," MPRA Paper 43790, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Vidal-Puga, Juan, 2015. "A non-cooperative approach to the ordinal Shapley–Shubik rule," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 111-118.

  16. Kibris, Ozgur, 2004. "Egalitarianism in ordinal bargaining: the Shapley-Shubik rule," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 157-170, October.

    Cited by:

    1. Geoffroy de Clippel, 2009. "Axiomatic Bargaining on Economic Enviornments with Lott," Working Papers 2009-5, Brown University, Department of Economics.
    2. Vidal-Puga, Juan, 2013. "A non-cooperative approach to the ordinal Shapley rule," MPRA Paper 43790, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Vidal-Puga, Juan, 2015. "A non-cooperative approach to the ordinal Shapley–Shubik rule," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 111-118.
    4. John Conley & Simon Wilkie, 2012. "The ordinal egalitarian bargaining solution for finite choice sets," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 38(1), pages 23-42, January.

  17. Bart Taub & Özgür Kibris, 2004. "Bargaining power in stationary parallelogram games," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 8(4), pages 449-464, April.

    Cited by:

    1. H. Moulin & A. Seth & B. Taub, 2020. "Self-enforcing cooperation via strategic investment," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 8(1), pages 1-11, April.

  18. Özgür Kıbrıs, 2003. "Constrained allocation problems with single-peaked preferences: An axiomatic analysis," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 20(3), pages 353-362, June.

    Cited by:

    1. Gustavo Bergantiños & Jordi Massó & Alejandro Neme, 2013. "The Division Problem under Constraints," Working Papers 745, Barcelona School of Economics.
    2. Özgür Kıbrıs & İpek Tapkı, 2014. "A mechanism design approach to allocating central government funds among regional development agencies," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 18(3), pages 163-189, September.
    3. Yamamura, Hirofumi, 2023. "Uniform rules for the allocation problem with single-dipped preferences when free-disposal is possible," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 230(C).
    4. Gustavo Bergantiños & Jordi Massó & Alejandro Neme, 2012. "The division problem with maximal capacity constraints," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 3(1), pages 29-57, March.
    5. Alfredo Burlando & Andrea Canidio & Rebekah Selby, 2021. "The Economics Of Savings Groups," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 62(4), pages 1569-1598, November.
    6. Manjunath, Vikram, 2012. "When too little is as good as nothing at all: Rationing a disposable good among satiable people with acceptance thresholds," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 74(2), pages 576-587.
    7. Özgür Kıbrıs, 2013. "On recursive solutions to simple allocation problems," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 75(3), pages 449-463, September.
    8. Anirban Kar & Özgür Kıbrıs, 2008. "Allocating multiple estates among agents with single-peaked preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 31(4), pages 641-666, December.
    9. Özgür Kıbrıs, 2012. "A revealed preference analysis of solutions to simple allocation problems," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 72(4), pages 509-523, April.
    10. Özgür Kıbrıs & Serkan Küçükşenel, 2009. "Uniform trade rules for uncleared markets," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 32(1), pages 101-121, January.
    11. Saralees Nadarajah, 2009. "The Pareto optimality distribution," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 43(6), pages 993-998, November.
    12. Mustafa Oguz Afacan & Nejat Anbarci & Ozgur Kıbrıs, 2022. "Arbiter Assignment," Department of Economics Working Papers 2022_02, Durham University, Department of Economics.

  19. Hokari, Toru & Kibris, Ozgur, 2003. "Consistency, converse consistency, and aspirations in TU-games," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 313-331, July.

    Cited by:

    1. Camelia Bejan & Juan Camilo Gómez & Anne van den Nouweland, 2022. "On the importance of reduced games in axiomatizing core extensions," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 59(3), pages 637-668, October.
    2. Elena Iñarra & Roberto Serrano & Ken-Ichi Shimomura, 2020. "The Nucleolus, the Kernel, and the Bargaining Set: An Update," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 71(2), pages 225-266.
    3. Camelia Bejan & Juan Gómez, 2012. "Axiomatizing core extensions," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 41(4), pages 885-898, November.
    4. Aslan, Fatma & Duman, Papatya & Trockel, Walter, 2019. "Duality for General TU-games Redefined," Center for Mathematical Economics Working Papers 620, Center for Mathematical Economics, Bielefeld University.
    5. Bejan, Camelia & Gómez, Juan Camilo & van den Nouweland, Anne, 2021. "Feasibility-free axiomatization of the core and its non-empty extension," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    6. Iñarra García, María Elena & Serrano, Roberto & Shimomura, Ken-Ichi, 2019. "The Nucleolus, the Kernel, and the Bargaining Set: An Update," IKERLANAK info:eu-repo/grantAgreeme, Universidad del País Vasco - Departamento de Fundamentos del Análisis Económico I.

  20. Kibris, Ozgur, 2002. "Misrepresentation of Utilities in Bargaining: Pure Exchange and Public Good Economies," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 91-110, April.
    See citations under working paper version above.

More information

Research fields, statistics, top rankings, if available.

Statistics

Access and download statistics for all items

Co-authorship network on CollEc

Featured entries

This author is featured on the following reading lists, publication compilations, Wikipedia, or ReplicationWiki entries:
  1. Turkish Economists

NEP Fields

NEP is an announcement service for new working papers, with a weekly report in each of many fields. This author has had 3 papers announced in NEP. These are the fields, ordered by number of announcements, along with their dates. If the author is listed in the directory of specialists for this field, a link is also provided.
  1. NEP-FMK: Financial Markets (2) 2005-08-13 2005-08-20
  2. NEP-DES: Economic Design (1) 2023-01-09
  3. NEP-FIN: Finance (1) 2005-08-20
  4. NEP-INT: International Trade (1) 2005-08-13
  5. NEP-SPO: Sports and Economics (1) 2023-01-09

Corrections

All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. For general information on how to correct material on RePEc, see these instructions.

To update listings or check citations waiting for approval, Ozgur Kibris
(Ozgur Kibris) should log into the RePEc Author Service.

To make corrections to the bibliographic information of a particular item, find the technical contact on the abstract page of that item. There, details are also given on how to add or correct references and citations.

To link different versions of the same work, where versions have a different title, use this form. Note that if the versions have a very similar title and are in the author's profile, the links will usually be created automatically.

Please note that most corrections can 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.