Emin Karagözoğlu
(Emin Karagozoglu)

Personal Details

First Name:	Emin
Middle Name:
Last Name:	Karagozoglu
Suffix:
RePEc Short-ID:	pka359
	[This author has chosen not to make the email address public]
	http://sites.google.com/site/eminkaragozoglu
	Bilkent University, Department of Economics, Bilkent 06800, Ankara / Turkey
	(+90) 312 290 1955
Terminal Degree:	(from RePEc Genealogy)

Affiliation

İktisat Bölümü
Bilkent Üniversitesi

Ankara, Turkey
http://econ.bilkent.edu.tr/
RePEc:edi:debiltr (more details at EDIRC)

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. Deren Caglayan & Emin Karagözoglu & Kerim Keskin & Cagri Saglam, 2020. "Effort Comparisons for a Class of Four-Player Tournaments," CESifo Working Paper Series 8761, CESifo.
   • Deren Çağlayan & Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin & Çağrı Sağlam, 2022. "Effort comparisons for a class of four-player tournaments," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 59(1), pages 119-137, July.

   Cited by:

   1. Serhat Doğan & Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin & Çağrı Sağlam, 2023. "Large Tullock contests," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 140(2), pages 169-179, October.
   2. Fabian Dietz & Marco Sahm, 2024. "Fairness in Round-Robin Tournaments with Four Players and Endogenous Sequences," CESifo Working Paper Series 11145, CESifo.
   3. Lauber, Arne & March, Christoph & Sahm, Marco, 2022. "Optimal and fair prizing in sequential round-robin tournaments: Experimental evidence," BERG Working Paper Series 176, Bamberg University, Bamberg Economic Research Group.
      • Lauber, Arne & March, Christoph & Sahm, Marco, 2023. "Optimal and fair prizing in sequential round-robin tournaments: Experimental evidence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 30-51.
      • Arne Lauber & Christoph March & Marco Sahm, 2022. "Optimal and Fair Prizing in Sequential Round-Robin Tournaments: Experimental Evidence," CESifo Working Paper Series 9651, CESifo.

2. Emin Karagözoglu & Cagri Saglam & Agah R. Turan, 2020. "Tullock Brings Perseverance and Suspense to Tug-of-War," CESifo Working Paper Series 8103, CESifo.

   Cited by:

   1. Karagözoğlu, Emin & Sağlam, Çağrı & Turan, Agah R., 2021. "Perseverance and suspense in tug-of-war," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).

3. Zafer Akýn & Emin Karagözoðlu, 2015. "The Role of Goals and Feedback in Incentivizing Performance," IPEK Working Papers 1506, Ipek University, Department of Economics, revised Aug 2015.
   • Zafer Akın & Emin Karagözoğlu, 2017. "The Role of Goals and Feedback in Incentivizing Performance," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(2), pages 193-211, March.

   Cited by:

   1. Dalmia, Prateik & Filiz-Ozbay, Emel, 2021. "Your success is my motivation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 49-85.
   2. Koch, Alexander K. & Nafziger, Julia, 2020. "Motivational goal bracketing: An experiment," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
      • Alexander K. Koch & Julia Nafziger, 2017. "Motivational Goal Bracketing: An Experiment," Economics Working Papers 2017-06, Department of Economics and Business Economics, Aarhus University.
      • Nafziger, Julia & Koch, Alexander K, 2019. "Motivational Goal Bracketing: An Experiment," CEPR Discussion Papers 13806, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
      • Koch, Alexander K. & Nafziger, Julia, 2017. "Motivational Goal Bracketing: An Experiment," IZA Discussion Papers 10955, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
   3. Markus Jung & Mischa Seiter, 2021. "Towards a better understanding on mitigating algorithm aversion in forecasting: an experimental study," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 495-516, December.
   4. Jonas Pilgaard Kaiser & Alexander K. Koch & Julia Nafziger, 2024. "Does goal revision undermine self-regulation through goals? An experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 27(3), pages 604-636, July.
   5. James Fan & Joaquín Gómez‐Miñambres & Samuel Smithers, 2020. "Make it too difficult, and I'll give up; let me succeed, and I'll excel: The interaction between assigned and personal goals," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(6), pages 964-975, September.
   6. Hoffmann, Christin & Thommes, Kirsten, 2020. "Can digital feedback increase employee performance and energy efficiency in firms? Evidence from a field experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 49-65.

4. Emin Karagözoglu & Martin G. Kocher, 2015. "Bargaining under Time Pressure," CESifo Working Paper Series 5685, CESifo.
   • Karagözoğlu, Emin & Kocher, Martin G., 2015. "Bargaining under Time Pressure," Discussion Papers in Economics 26642, University of Munich, Department of Economics.

   Cited by:

   1. Federica Alberti & Sven Fischer & Werner Güth & Kei Tsutsui, 2018. "Concession Bargaining," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 62(9), pages 2017-2039, October.
   2. Anbarci, Nejat & Feltovich, Nick, 2018. "How fully do people exploit their bargaining position? The effects of bargaining institution and the 50–50 norm," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 320-334.
   3. Lindner, Florian & Rose, Julia, 2017. "No need for more time: Intertemporal allocation decisions under time pressure," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 53-70.
      • Florian Lindner & Julia Rose, 2016. "No need for more time: Intertemporal allocation decisions under time pressure," Working Papers 2016-24, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
   4. Bolton, Gary E. & Karagözoğlu, Emin, 2016. "On the influence of hard leverage in a soft leverage bargaining game: The importance of credible claims," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 164-179.

5. Gerards, R. & Muysken, J. & Welters, R.A.M.H.M., 2010. "Active labor market policy by a profit maximizing firm," Research Memorandum 042, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
   • Ruud Gerards & Joan Muysken & Riccardo Welters, 2014. "Active Labour Market Policy by a Profit-Maximizing Firm," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 52(1), pages 136-157, March.

   Cited by:

   1. Michael Funke & Yu-Fu Chen & Aaron Mehrota, 2011. "Global warming and extreme events: Rethinking the timing and intensity of environment policy," Quantitative Macroeconomics Working Papers 21105, Hamburg University, Department of Economics.
      • Michael Funke & Yu-Fu Chen, 2010. "Global warming and extreme events: Rethinking the timing and intensity of environment policy," Quantitative Macroeconomics Working Papers 21007b, Hamburg University, Department of Economics.
      • Chen, Yu-Fu & Funke, Michael, 2010. "Global Warming And Extreme Events: Rethinking The Timing And Intensity Of Environmental Policy," SIRE Discussion Papers 2010-48, Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE).
      • Yu-Fu Chen & Michael Funke, 2010. "Global Warming and Extreme Events: Rethinking the Timing and Intensity of Environmental Policy," CESifo Working Paper Series 3139, CESifo.
      • Yu-Fu Chen & Michael Funke, 2010. "Global Warming And Extreme Events: Rethinking The Timing And Intensity Of Environmental Policy," Dundee Discussion Papers in Economics 236, Economic Studies, University of Dundee.
   2. Cörvers, Frank & Reinold, Julia & Chakkar, Saena & Bolzonella, Francesco & Ronda, Vera, 2021. "Literature review labour migration," ROA Technical Report 005, Maastricht University, Research Centre for Education and the Labour Market (ROA).

6. Emin Karagözoglu & Arno Riedl, 2010. "Information, Uncertainty, and Subjective Entitlements in Bargaining," CESifo Working Paper Series 3133, CESifo.
   • Karagozoglu, Emin & Riedl, Arno, 2010. "Information, Uncertainty, and Subjective Entitlements in Bargaining," IZA Discussion Papers 5079, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
   • Karagozoglu, E. & Riedl, A.M., 2010. "Information, uncertainty, and subjective entitlements in bargaining," Research Memorandum 043, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).

   Cited by:

   1. Mitesh Kataria & Natalia Montinari, 2012. "Risk, Entitlements and Fairness Bias: Explaining Preferences for Redistribution in Multi-person Setting," Jena Economics Research Papers 2012-061, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
   2. Fabian Paetzel & Rupert Sausgruber & Stefan Traub, 2014. "Social Preferences and Voting on Reform: An Experimental Study," Department of Economics Working Papers wuwp172, Vienna University of Economics and Business, Department of Economics.
      • Paetzel, Fabian & Sausgruber, Rupert & Traub, Stefan, 2014. "Social preferences and voting on reform: An experimental study," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 36-55.
      • Paetzel, Fabian & Sausgruber, Rupert & Traub, Stefan, 2014. "Social Preferences and Voting on Reform: An Experimental Study," Department of Economics Working Paper Series 172, WU Vienna University of Economics and Business.
   3. Rodriguez-Lara, Ismael, 2016. "Equity and bargaining power in ultimatum games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 144-165.
      • Rodriguez-Lara, Ismael, 2016. "Equity and bargaining power in ultimatum games," MPRA Paper 72700, University Library of Munich, Germany.
   4. Anita Gantner & Kristian Horn & Rudolf Kerschbamer, 2013. "Fair Division in Unanimity Bargaining with Subjective Claims," Working Papers 2013-31, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
   5. Gantner, Anita & Kerschbamer, Rudolf, 2016. "Fairness and efficiency in a subjective claims problem," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 131(PA), pages 21-36.
      • Anita Gantner & Rudolf Kerschbamer, 2013. "Fairness and Efficiency in a Subjective Claims Problem," Working Papers 2013-30, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.

7. Itai Ashlagi & Emin Karagozoglu & Bettina Klaus, 2008. "A Noncooperative Support for Equal Division in Estate Division Problems," Harvard Business School Working Papers 09-069, Harvard Business School.
   • Ashlagi, Itai & Karagözoğlu, Emin & Klaus, Bettina, 2012. "A non-cooperative support for equal division in estate division problems," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 63(3), pages 228-233.

   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).
      • Emin Karagözoğlu, 2014. "A noncooperative approach to bankruptcy problems with an endogenous estate," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 217(1), pages 299-318, June.
      • Karagozoglu, E., 2008. "A noncooperative approach to bankruptcy problems with an endogeneous estate," Research Memorandum 031, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
   2. Mariotti, Marco & Wen, Quan, 2021. "A noncooperative foundation of the competitive divisions for bads," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
   3. Soo-Haeng Cho & Christopher S. Tang, 2014. "Technical Note---Capacity Allocation Under Retail Competition: Uniform and Competitive Allocations," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 62(1), pages 72-80, February.
   4. Esat Cetemen & Emin Karagözoğlu, 2014. "Implementing equal division with an ultimatum threat," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 77(2), pages 223-236, August.
   5. Anita Gantner & Kristian Horn & Rudolf Kerschbamer, 2013. "Fair Division in Unanimity Bargaining with Subjective Claims," Working Papers 2013-31, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
   6. Emin Karagözoğlu & Shiran Rachmilevitch, 2018. "Implementing egalitarianism in a class of Nash demand games," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 85(3), pages 495-508, October.
   7. Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin & Çağrı Sağlam, 2023. "(In)efficiency and equitability of equilibrium outcomes in a family of bargaining games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 52(1), pages 175-193, March.
   8. Greil, Stefan & Schwarz, Christian & Stein, Stefan, "undated". "Perceived Fairness in the Taxation of a Digital Business Model [Fairness und die Besteuerung digitaler Geschäftsmodelle]," Duesseldorf Working Papers in Applied Management and Economics 47, Duesseldorf University of Applied Sciences.
   9. Urs Fischbacher & Nadja Kairies-Schwarz & Ulrike Stefani, 2017. "Non-additivity and the Salience of Marginal Productivities: Experimental Evidence on Distributive Fairness," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 84(336), pages 587-610, October.
   10. 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.
       • William Thomson, 2013. "Axiomatic and game-theoretic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: an update," RCER Working Papers 578, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
   11. Doudou Gong & Genjiu Xu & Xuanzhu Jin & Loyimee Gogoi, 2022. "A sequential partition method for non-cooperative games of bankruptcy problems," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 30(2), pages 359-379, July.
   12. Karagözoğlu, Emin & Keskin, Kerim & Sağlam, Çağrı, 2013. "A minimally altruistic refinement of Nash equilibrium," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 66(3), pages 422-430.
   13. Ashlagi, Itai & Karagözoğlu, Emin & Klaus, Bettina, 2012. "A non-cooperative support for equal division in estate division problems," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 63(3), pages 228-233.
       • Itai Ashlagi & Emin Karagozoglu & Bettina Klaus, 2008. "A Noncooperative Support for Equal Division in Estate Division Problems," Harvard Business School Working Papers 09-069, Harvard Business School.
   14. Shiran Rachmilevitch, 2020. "Rewarding moderate behavior in a dynamic Nash Demand Game," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 49(2), pages 639-650, June.

8. Karagozoglu, E., 2008. "Distributive concerns in the bankruptcy problem with an endogenous estate," Research Memorandum 032, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).

   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).
      • Emin Karagözoğlu, 2014. "A noncooperative approach to bankruptcy problems with an endogenous estate," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 217(1), pages 299-318, June.
      • Karagozoglu, E., 2008. "A noncooperative approach to bankruptcy problems with an endogeneous estate," Research Memorandum 031, 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.
      • William Thomson, 2013. "Axiomatic and game-theoretic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: an update," RCER Working Papers 578, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).

9. Karagozoglu, E., 2008. "A noncooperative approach to bankruptcy problems with an endogeneous estate," Research Memorandum 031, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
   • Emin Karagözoğlu, 2014. "A noncooperative approach to bankruptcy problems with an endogenous estate," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 217(1), pages 299-318, June.
   • 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).

   Cited by:

   1. Cappelen, Alexander W. & Luttens, Roland I. & Sørensen, Erik Ø. & Tungodden, Bertil, 2015. "Fairness in bankruptcy situations: an experimental study," Discussion Paper Series in Economics 17/2015, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Economics.
   2. Koster, Maurice & Boonen, Tim J., 2019. "Constrained stochastic cost allocation," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 20-30.
   3. Boonen, Tim J., 2019. "Equilibrium recoveries in insurance markets with limited liability," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 38-45.
   4. Doudou Gong & Genjiu Xu & Xuanzhu Jin & Loyimee Gogoi, 2022. "A sequential partition method for non-cooperative games of bankruptcy problems," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 30(2), pages 359-379, July.
   5. Karagozoglu, E., 2008. "Distributive concerns in the bankruptcy problem with an endogenous estate," Research Memorandum 032, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
   6. J. Arin & V. Feltkamp & M. Montero, 2015. "A bargaining procedure leading to the serial rule in games with veto players," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 229(1), pages 41-66, June.
   7. 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.
   8. Schumacher, Johannes M., 2021. "Ex-ante estate division under strong Pareto efficiency," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 10-24.

10. Flesch, J. & Karagozoglu, E. & Perea ý Monsuwé, A., 2007. "Optimal search for a moving target with the option to wait," Research Memorandum 051, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    • János Flesch & Emin Karagözoǧlu & Andrés Perea, 2009. "Optimal search for a moving target with the option to wait," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 56(6), pages 526-539, September.

    Cited by:

    1. Benoit Duvocelle & J'anos Flesch & Hui Min Shi & Dries Vermeulen, 2020. "Search for a moving target in a competitive environment," Papers 2008.09653, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2020.
       • Benoit Duvocelle & János Flesch & Hui Min Shi & Dries Vermeulen, 2021. "Search for a moving target in a competitive environment," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 50(2), pages 547-557, June.
    2. Benoit Duvocelle & J'anos Flesch & Mathias Staudigl & Dries Vermeulen, 2020. "A competitive search game with a moving target," Papers 2008.12032, arXiv.org.
       • Duvocelle, Benoit & Flesch, János & Staudigl, Mathias & Vermeulen, Dries, 2022. "A competitive search game with a moving target," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 303(2), pages 945-957.

Articles

1. Serhat Doğan & Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin & Hüseyin Çağrı Sağlam, 2023. "Titans that Clash and a State that Buffers," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 67(2-3), pages 210-234, February.

   Cited by:

   1. Serhat Doğan & Kerim Keskin & Çağrı Sağlam, 2023. "Analyzing strategic behavior in a dynamic model of bargaining and war," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 140(3), pages 233-257, December.

2. Emin Karagözoğlu & Elif Tosun, 2022. "Endogenous Game Choice and Giving Behavior in Distribution Games," Games, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-32, November.

   Cited by:

   1. Valerio Capraro & Roberto Di Paolo & Veronica Pizziol, 2023. "Assessing Large Language Models' ability to predict how humans balance self-interest and the interest of others," Papers 2307.12776, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2024.

3. Deren Çağlayan & Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin & Çağrı Sağlam, 2022. "Effort comparisons for a class of four-player tournaments," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 59(1), pages 119-137, July.
   • Deren Caglayan & Emin Karagözoglu & Kerim Keskin & Cagri Saglam, 2020. "Effort Comparisons for a Class of Four-Player Tournaments," CESifo Working Paper Series 8761, CESifo.
   See citations under working paper version above.
4. Tarık Kara & Emin Karagözoğlu & Elif Özcan-Tok, 2021. "Bargaining, Reference Points, and Limited Influence," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 326-362, June.

   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.

5. Emin Karagözoğlu & Shiran Rachmilevitch, 2021. "Costly Preparations in Bargaining," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 123(2), pages 532-557, April.

   Cited by:

   1. Houba, Harold & Li, Duozhe & Wen, Quan, 2022. "Bargaining with costly competition for the right to propose," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
   2. Sarah Auster & Nenad Kos & Salvatore Piccolo, 2021. "Optimal pricing, private information and search for an outside offer," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 52(4), pages 758-777, December.
   3. Manuel A. Utset, 2023. "Time-Inconsistent Bargaining and Cross-Commitments," Games, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-21, April.

6. Emin Karagözoğlu & Martin G. Kocher, 2019. "Bargaining under time pressure from deadlines," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(2), pages 419-440, June.

   Cited by:

   1. Fabio Galeotti & Maria Montero & Anders Poulsen, 2018. "The Attraction and Compromise Effects in Bargaining: Experimental Evidence," Post-Print halshs-01820223, HAL.
      • Fabio Galeotti, 2017. "The Attraction and Compromise Effects in Bargaining: Experimental Evidence," Post-Print halshs-01657317, HAL.
      • Fabio Galeotti & Maria Montero & Anders Poulsen, 2017. "The attraction and compromise effects in bargaining: Experimental evidence," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Behavioural and Experimental Social Science (CBESS) 17-04, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
      • Fabio Galeotti & Maria Montero & Anders Poulsen, 2020. "The Attraction and Compromise Effects in Bargaining: Experimental Evidence," Working Papers halshs-02466032, HAL.
      • Fabio Galeotti & Maria Montero & Anders Poulsen, 2022. "The Attraction and Compromise Effects in Bargaining: Experimental Evidence," Post-Print hal-03514435, HAL.
      • Fabio Galeotti & Maria Montero & Anders Poulsen, 2022. "The Attraction and Compromise Effects in Bargaining: Experimental Evidence," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(4), pages 2987-3007, April.
   2. Tarık Kara & Emin Karagözoğlu & Elif Özcan-Tok, 2021. "Bargaining, Reference Points, and Limited Influence," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 326-362, June.
   3. Grewenig, Elisabeth & Werner, Katharina & Woessmann, Ludger & Lergetporer, Philipp, 2019. "Incentives, Search Engines, and the Elicitation of Subjective Beliefs: Evidence from Representative Online Survey Experiments," IZA Discussion Papers 12217, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
      • Grewenig, Elisabeth & Lergetporer, Philipp & Werner, Katharina & Woessmann, Ludger, 2019. "Incentives, Search Engines, and the Elicitation of Subjective Beliefs: Evidence From Representative Online Survey Experiments," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 146, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
      • Elisabeth Grewenig & Philipp Lergetporer & Katharina Werner & Ludger Woessmann, 2019. "Incentives, search engines, and the elicitation of subjective beliefs: evidence from representative online survey experiments," CESifo Working Paper Series 7556, CESifo.
      • Grewenig, Elisabeth & Lergetporer, Philipp & Werner, Katharina & Woessmann, Ludger, 2022. "Incentives, search engines, and the elicitation of subjective beliefs: Evidence from representative online survey experiments," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 231(1), pages 304-326.
   4. Aaron Kamm & Simon Siegenthaler, 2024. "Commitment timing in coalitional bargaining," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 27(1), pages 130-154, March.
   5. Cao, Qian & Li, Jianbiao & Niu, Xiaofei, 2022. "Tempus fugit: The impact of time constraint on investor behavior," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 67-81.
   6. Feltovich, Nick, 2019. "Is earned bargaining power more fully exploited?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 152-180.
   7. Johannes Carow & Niklas M. Witzig, 2024. "Time Pressure and Strategic Risk-Taking in Professional Chess," Working Papers 2404, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
   8. Wei Zhang & Jingqi Wang & Reza Ahmadi & Sriram Dasu, 2021. "Timing the Price Agreement in High‐Tech Component Procurement," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(11), pages 4105-4120, November.
   9. Burns, Nathaniel A. & Deck, Cary A. & Thomas, Charles J., 2023. "Experimental analysis of impatience in bilateral and multilateral negotiations," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
   10. Dilmaghani, Maryam, 2020. "Gender differences in performance under time constraint: Evidence from chess tournaments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
   11. Lana Friesen & Ian A. MacKenzie & Mai Phuong Nguyen, 2022. "Initially contestable property rights and Coase: evidence from the lab," Discussion Papers Series 656, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
       • Friesen, Lana & MacKenzie, Ian A. & Nguyen, Mai Phuong, 2023. "Initially contestable property rights and Coase: Evidence from the lab," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
   12. Baranski, Andrzej & Haas, Nicholas, 2023. "The timing of communication and retaliation in bargaining: An experimental study," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
   13. Niu, Xiaofei & Li, Jianbiao, 2019. "How Time Constraint Affects the Disposition Effect?," EconStor Preprints 194618, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.

7. Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin & Elif Özcan-Tok, 2019. "Between anchors and aspirations: a new family of bargaining solutions," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 23(1), pages 53-73, June.

   Cited by:

   1. Carlos Alós-Ferrer & Jaume García-Segarra & Miguel Ginés-Vilar, 2018. "Anchoring on Utopia: a generalization of the Kalai–Smorodinsky solution," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 6(2), pages 141-155, October.
   2. Tarık Kara & Emin Karagözoğlu & Elif Özcan-Tok, 2021. "Bargaining, Reference Points, and Limited Influence," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 326-362, June.
   3. Feltovich, Nick, 2019. "Is earned bargaining power more fully exploited?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 152-180.
   4. 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.

8. Emin Karagözoğlu & Shiran Rachmilevitch, 2018. "Implementing egalitarianism in a class of Nash demand games," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 85(3), pages 495-508, October.

   Cited by:

   1. Rachmilevitch, Shiran, 2020. "An implementation of the Nash bargaining solution by iterated strict dominance," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
   2. Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin & Çağrı Sağlam, 2023. "(In)efficiency and equitability of equilibrium outcomes in a family of bargaining games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 52(1), pages 175-193, March.
   3. 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.
   4. Shiran Rachmilevitch, 2022. "Reasonable Nash demand games," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 93(2), pages 319-330, September.
   5. Shiran Rachmilevitch, 2019. "Egalitarianism, utilitarianism, and the Nash bargaining solution," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 52(4), pages 741-751, April.
   6. Shiran Rachmilevitch, 2020. "Rewarding moderate behavior in a dynamic Nash Demand Game," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 49(2), pages 639-650, June.

9. Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin, 2018. "Endogenous reference points in bargaining," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 88(2), pages 283-295, October.

   Cited by:

   1. Tarık Kara & Emin Karagözoğlu & Elif Özcan-Tok, 2021. "Bargaining, Reference Points, and Limited Influence," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 326-362, June.
   2. 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.
   3. Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin, 2015. "A Tale of Two Bargaining Solutions," Games, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-14, June.
   4. 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.
   5. Topi Miettinen & Olli Ropponen & Pekka Sääskilahti, 2020. "Prospect Theory, Fairness, and the Escalation of Conflict at a Negotiation Impasse," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 122(4), pages 1535-1574, October.
   6. Khan, Abhimanyu, 2022. "Expected utility versus cumulative prospect theory in an evolutionary model of bargaining," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).

10. Karagözoğlu, Emin & Keskin, Kerim, 2018. "Time-varying fairness concerns, delay, and disagreement in bargaining," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 115-128.

    Cited by:

    1. Guha, Brishti, 2019. "Malice in pretrial negotiations," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 25-33.

11. Doğan, Serhat & Karagözoğlu, Emin & Keskin, Kerim & Sağlam, Çağrı, 2018. "Multi-player race," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 123-136.

    Cited by:

    1. Emin Karagözoglu & Kerim Keskin & Cagri Saglam, 2020. "Race Meets Bargaining in Product Development," CESifo Working Paper Series 8109, CESifo.
       • Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin & Çağrı Sağlam, 2021. "Race meets bargaining in product development," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(3), pages 702-709, April.
    2. Deren Caglayan & Emin Karagözoglu & Kerim Keskin & Cagri Saglam, 2020. "Effort Comparisons for a Class of Four-Player Tournaments," CESifo Working Paper Series 8761, CESifo.
       • Deren Çağlayan & Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin & Çağrı Sağlam, 2022. "Effort comparisons for a class of four-player tournaments," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 59(1), pages 119-137, July.
    3. Peter-J. Jost, 2021. "“The ball is round, the game lasts 90 minutes, everything else is pure theoryâ€," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 22(1), pages 27-74, January.
    4. Christian Ewerhart & Julian Teichgräber, 2019. "Multi-battle contests, finite automata, and the tug-of-war," ECON - Working Papers 318, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    5. Emin Karagözoglu & Cagri Saglam & Agah R. Turan, 2020. "Tullock Brings Perseverance and Suspense to Tug-of-War," CESifo Working Paper Series 8103, CESifo.

12. Emin Karagözoğlu & Ümit Barış Urhan, 2017. "The Effect of Stake Size in Experimental Bargaining and Distribution Games: A Survey," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 285-325, March.

    Cited by:

    1. James C. Cox & Vjollca Sadiraj, 2018. "Incentives," Experimental Economics Center Working Paper Series 2018-01, Experimental Economics Center, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    2. Giovanni Ponti & Marcello Sartarelli & Iryna Sikora & Zhukova Vita, 2018. "Gaining Experience as Principal or Agent. An Experimental Study," Working Papers. Serie AD 2018-08, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
    3. Zhang, Yanling & Chen, Xiaojie & Liu, Aizhi & Sun, Changyin, 2018. "The effect of the stake size on the evolution of fairness," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 321(C), pages 641-653.
    4. Briony D. Pulford & Andrew M. Colman & Graham Loomes, 2018. "Incentive Magnitude Effects in Experimental Games: Bigger is not Necessarily Better," Games, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-10, January.
    5. Gert Jan Hofstede & Catholijn M. Jonker & Tim Verwaart & Neil Yorke-Smith, 2019. "The Lemon Car Game Across Cultures: Evidence of Relational Rationality," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 28(5), pages 849-877, October.
    6. Astrid Kause & Oliver Vitouch & Judith Glück, 2018. "How selfish is a thirsty man? A pilot study on comparing sharing behavior with primary and secondary rewards," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(8), pages 1-11, August.
    7. Hopp, Daniel, 2022. "High incentives without high cost - The role of (perceived) stake sizes in dictator games," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    8. Subrato Banerjee, 2020. "Effect of reduced opportunities on bargaining outcomes: an experiment with status asymmetries," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 89(3), pages 313-346, October.

13. Zafer Akın & Emin Karagözoğlu, 2017. "The Role of Goals and Feedback in Incentivizing Performance," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(2), pages 193-211, March.
    • Zafer Akýn & Emin Karagözoðlu, 2015. "The Role of Goals and Feedback in Incentivizing Performance," IPEK Working Papers 1506, Ipek University, Department of Economics, revised Aug 2015.
    See citations under working paper version above.
14. Bolton, Gary E. & Karagözoğlu, Emin, 2016. "On the influence of hard leverage in a soft leverage bargaining game: The importance of credible claims," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 164-179.

    Cited by:

    1. Vittorio Pelligra & Tommaso Reggiani & Daniel John Zizzo, 2020. "Responding to (un)reasonable requests by an authority," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 89(3), pages 287-311, October.
       • Vittorio Pelligra & Tommaso Reggiani & Daniel John Zizzo, 2020. "Responding to (Un)Reasonable Requests by an Authority," MUNI ECON Working Papers 2020-04, Masaryk University, revised Feb 2023.
       • Pelligra, Vittorio & Reggiani, Tommaso & Zizzo, Daniel John, 2020. "Responding to (Un)Reasonable Requests by an Authority," Cardiff Economics Working Papers E2020/7, Cardiff University, Cardiff Business School, Economics Section.
    2. Tarık Kara & Emin Karagözoğlu & Elif Özcan-Tok, 2021. "Bargaining, Reference Points, and Limited Influence," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 326-362, June.
    3. 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.
    4. Embrey, Matthew & Hyndman, Kyle & Riedl, Arno, 2021. "Bargaining with a residual claimant: An experimental study," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 335-354.
       • Matthew Embrey & Kyle Hyndmanz & Arno Riedl, 2020. "Bargaining with a Residual Claimant: An Experimental Study," Working Paper Series 1520, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
       • Matthew Embrey & Kyle Hyndman & Arno Riedl, 2019. "Bargaining with a Residual Claimant: An Experimental Study," Working Paper Series 0419, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
       • Matthew Embrey & Kyle Hyndman & Arno Riedl, 2014. "Bargaining with a Residual Claimant: An Experimental Study," CESifo Working Paper Series 5087, CESifo.
       • Embrey, M.S. & Hyndman, K. & Riedl, A.M., 2014. "Bargaining with a residual claimant: An experimental study," Research Memorandum 039, Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).
    5. Federica Alberti & Sven Fischer & Werner Güth & Kei Tsutsui, 2018. "Concession Bargaining," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 62(9), pages 2017-2039, October.
    6. Andrew M. Davis & Kyle Hyndman, 2019. "Multidimensional Bargaining and Inventory Risk in Supply Chains: An Experimental Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(3), pages 1286-1304, March.
    7. Karagözoğlu, Emin & Keskin, Kerim, 2018. "Time-varying fairness concerns, delay, and disagreement in bargaining," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 115-128.
    8. Feltovich, Nick, 2019. "Is earned bargaining power more fully exploited?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 152-180.
    9. Heike Hennig-Schmidt & Bernd Irlenbusch & Rainer Michael Rilke & Gari Walkowitz, 2018. "Asymmetric outside options in ultimatum bargaining: a systematic analysis," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 47(1), pages 301-329, March.
    10. Anbarci, Nejat & Feltovich, Nick, 2018. "How fully do people exploit their bargaining position? The effects of bargaining institution and the 50–50 norm," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 320-334.
    11. Emin Karagözoğlu & Martin G. Kocher, 2019. "Bargaining under time pressure from deadlines," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(2), pages 419-440, June.
    12. Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin & Elif Özcan-Tok, 2019. "Between anchors and aspirations: a new family of bargaining solutions," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 23(1), pages 53-73, June.
    13. Lozano, Lina & Riedl, Arno & Rott, Christina, 2024. "The Impact of the Menstrual Cycle on Bargaining Behavior," IZA Discussion Papers 16768, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
        • Lina Lozano & Arno Riedl & Christina Rott, 2024. "The Impact of the Menstrual Cycle on Bargaining Behavior," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 24-009/I, Tinbergen Institute.
        • Lina Lozano & Arno Riedl & Christina Rott, 2024. "The Impact of the Menstrual Cycle on Bargaining Behavior," CESifo Working Paper Series 10932, CESifo.
    14. Hyndman, Kyle, 2021. "Dissolving partnerships under risk: An experimental investigation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 702-720.
    15. John Duffy & Lucie Lebeau & Daniela Puzzello, 2021. "Bargaining Under Liquidity Constraints: Nash vs. Kalai in the Laboratory," Working Papers 2113, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.
    16. Jack Fanning & Andrew Kloosterman, 2022. "An experimental test of the Coase conjecture: Fairness in dynamic bargaining," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 53(1), pages 138-165, March.
    17. Hyndman, Kyle, 2023. "Dynamic fairness in repeated bargaining with risk," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    18. Mago, Shakun D. & Pate, Jennifer & Razzolini, Laura, 2024. "Experimental evidence on the role of outside obligations in wage negotiations," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 219(C), pages 528-548.
    19. Baranski, Andrzej & Haas, Nicholas, 2023. "The timing of communication and retaliation in bargaining: An experimental study," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    20. Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin, 2018. "Endogenous reference points in bargaining," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 88(2), pages 283-295, October.
    21. Subrato Banerjee, 2020. "Effect of reduced opportunities on bargaining outcomes: an experiment with status asymmetries," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 89(3), pages 313-346, October.

15. Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin, 2015. "A Tale of Two Bargaining Solutions," Games, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-14, June.

    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.

16. Emin Karagözoğlu & Arno Riedl, 2015. "Performance Information, Production Uncertainty, and Subjective Entitlements in Bargaining," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(11), pages 2611-2626, November.

    Cited by:

    1. Karagözoğlu, Emin & Kocher, Martin G., 2015. "Bargaining under Time Pressure," Discussion Papers in Economics 26642, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
       • Emin Karagözoglu & Martin G. Kocher, 2015. "Bargaining under Time Pressure," CESifo Working Paper Series 5685, CESifo.
    2. Wulf Gaertner & Richard Bradley & Yongsheng Xu & Lars Schwettmann, 2019. "Against the proportionality principle: Experimental findings on bargaining over losses," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(7), pages 1-18, July.
    3. Rodriguez-Lara, Ismael, 2016. "Equity and bargaining power in ultimatum games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 144-165.
       • Rodriguez-Lara, Ismael, 2016. "Equity and bargaining power in ultimatum games," MPRA Paper 72700, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. 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.
    5. Colin F. Camerer & Gideon Nave & Alec Smith, 2019. "Dynamic Unstructured Bargaining with Private Information: Theory, Experiment, and Outcome Prediction via Machine Learning," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(4), pages 1867-1890, April.
    6. Embrey, Matthew & Hyndman, Kyle & Riedl, Arno, 2021. "Bargaining with a residual claimant: An experimental study," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 335-354.
       • Matthew Embrey & Kyle Hyndmanz & Arno Riedl, 2020. "Bargaining with a Residual Claimant: An Experimental Study," Working Paper Series 1520, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
       • Matthew Embrey & Kyle Hyndman & Arno Riedl, 2019. "Bargaining with a Residual Claimant: An Experimental Study," Working Paper Series 0419, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
       • Matthew Embrey & Kyle Hyndman & Arno Riedl, 2014. "Bargaining with a Residual Claimant: An Experimental Study," CESifo Working Paper Series 5087, CESifo.
       • Embrey, M.S. & Hyndman, K. & Riedl, A.M., 2014. "Bargaining with a residual claimant: An experimental study," Research Memorandum 039, Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).
    7. Takeuchi, Ai & Veszteg, Róbert F. & Kamijo, Yoshio & Funaki, Yukihiko, 2022. "Bargaining over a jointly produced pie: The effect of the production function on bargaining outcomes," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 169-198.
    8. Luhan, Wolfgang J. & Poulsen, Anders U. & Roos, Michael W.M., 2017. "Real-time tacit bargaining, payoff focality, and coordination complexity: Experimental evidence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 687-699.
       • Wolfgang Luhan & Anders Poulsen & Michael Roos, 2015. "Real time tacit bargaining, payoff focality, and coordination complexity: Experimental evidence," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Behavioural and Experimental Social Science (CBESS) 15-11, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    9. Romain Espinosa & Bruno Deffains & Christian Thöni, 2020. "Debiasing preferences over redistribution: an experiment," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 55(4), pages 823-843, December.
       • Romain Espinosa & Bruno Deffains & Christian Thöni, 2020. "Debiasing preferences over redistribution: An experiment," Post-Print halshs-02614203, HAL.
       • Romain Espinosa & Bruno Deffains & Christian Thöni, 2020. "Debiasing preferences over redistribution: An experiment," Cahiers de Recherches Economiques du Département d'économie 20.03, Université de Lausanne, Faculté des HEC, Département d’économie.
    10. Karagözoğlu, Emin & Keskin, Kerim, 2018. "Time-varying fairness concerns, delay, and disagreement in bargaining," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 115-128.
    11. Feltovich, Nick, 2019. "Is earned bargaining power more fully exploited?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 152-180.
    12. Anbarci, Nejat & Feltovich, Nick, 2018. "How fully do people exploit their bargaining position? The effects of bargaining institution and the 50–50 norm," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 320-334.
    13. Fabio Galeotti & Maria Montero & Anders Poulsen, 2019. "Efficiency Versus Equality in Bargaining," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 17(6), pages 1941-1970.
        • Fabio Galeotti & Maria Montero & Anders Poulsen, 2019. "Efficiency versus Equality in Bargaining," Post-Print halshs-01763003, HAL.
        • Fabio Galeotti & Maria Montero & Anders Poulsen, 2015. "Efficiency versus Equality in Bargaining," Discussion Papers 2015-18, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    14. Emin Karagözoğlu & Martin G. Kocher, 2019. "Bargaining under time pressure from deadlines," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(2), pages 419-440, June.
    15. Gantner, Anita & Kerschbamer, Rudolf, 2016. "Fairness and efficiency in a subjective claims problem," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 131(PA), pages 21-36.
        • Anita Gantner & Rudolf Kerschbamer, 2013. "Fairness and Efficiency in a Subjective Claims Problem," Working Papers 2013-30, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    16. Fabio Galeotti & Maria Montero & Anders Poulsen, 2015. "Efficiency versus equality in real-time bargaining with communication," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Behavioural and Experimental Social Science (CBESS) 15-18, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    17. Lozano, Lina & Riedl, Arno & Rott, Christina, 2024. "The Impact of the Menstrual Cycle on Bargaining Behavior," IZA Discussion Papers 16768, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
        • Lina Lozano & Arno Riedl & Christina Rott, 2024. "The Impact of the Menstrual Cycle on Bargaining Behavior," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 24-009/I, Tinbergen Institute.
        • Lina Lozano & Arno Riedl & Christina Rott, 2024. "The Impact of the Menstrual Cycle on Bargaining Behavior," CESifo Working Paper Series 10932, CESifo.
    18. Anita Gantner & Regine Oexl, 2023. "Respecting entitlements in legislative bargaining: A matter of preference or necessity?," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 56(2), pages 490-519, May.
    19. Hyndman, Kyle, 2021. "Dissolving partnerships under risk: An experimental investigation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 702-720.
    20. Konow, James & Saijo, Tatsuyoshi & Akai, Kenju, 2020. "Equity versus equality: Spectators, stakeholders and groups," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    21. Cavalan, Quentin & de Gardelle, Vincent & Vergnaud, Jean-Christophe, 2022. "I did most of the work! Three sources of bias in bargaining with joint production," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    22. Regine Oexl & Anita Gantner, 2021. "Respecting Entitlements in Legislative Bargaining - A Matter of Preference or Necessity?," Working Papers 2021-25, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    23. Hyndman, Kyle, 2023. "Dynamic fairness in repeated bargaining with risk," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    24. Schmitz, Patrick W. & Kusterer, David J., 2018. "Government versus Private Ownership of Public Goods: Experimental Evidence," CEPR Discussion Papers 13204, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    25. Bolton, Gary E. & Karagözoğlu, Emin, 2016. "On the influence of hard leverage in a soft leverage bargaining game: The importance of credible claims," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 164-179.

17. Emin Karagözoğlu, 2014. "A noncooperative approach to bankruptcy problems with an endogenous estate," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 217(1), pages 299-318, June.
    • 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).
    • Karagozoglu, E., 2008. "A noncooperative approach to bankruptcy problems with an endogeneous estate," Research Memorandum 031, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    See citations under working paper version above.
18. Esat Cetemen & Emin Karagözoğlu, 2014. "Implementing equal division with an ultimatum threat," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 77(2), pages 223-236, August.

    Cited by:

    1. Shiran Rachmilevitch, "undated". "Punishing greediness in Divide-the-dollar games," Working Papers WP2016/4, University of Haifa, Department of Economics.
       • Shiran Rachmilevitch, 2017. "Punishing greediness in divide-the-dollar games," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 82(3), pages 341-351, March.
    2. Emin Karagözoğlu & Shiran Rachmilevitch, 2018. "Implementing egalitarianism in a class of Nash demand games," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 85(3), pages 495-508, October.
    3. Emin Karagözoğlu & Kerim Keskin & Çağrı Sağlam, 2023. "(In)efficiency and equitability of equilibrium outcomes in a family of bargaining games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 52(1), pages 175-193, March.
    4. Emin Karagözoğlu & Martin G. Kocher, 2019. "Bargaining under time pressure from deadlines," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(2), pages 419-440, June.
    5. Shiran Rachmilevitch, 2022. "Reasonable Nash demand games," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 93(2), pages 319-330, September.
    6. Gonzalez-Sanchez, Eric & Loyola, Gino, 2024. "Ultimatum bargaining with envy under incomplete information," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 1-11.
    7. Shiran Rachmilevitch, 2020. "Rewarding moderate behavior in a dynamic Nash Demand Game," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 49(2), pages 639-650, June.

19. Karagözoğlu, Emin & Keskin, Kerim & Sağlam, Çağrı, 2013. "A minimally altruistic refinement of Nash equilibrium," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 66(3), pages 422-430.

    Cited by:

    1. Takashi Kamihigashi & Kerim Keskin & Çağrı Sağlam, 2017. "Organizational Refinements of Nash Equilibrium," Discussion Paper Series DP2017-25, Research Institute for Economics & Business Administration, Kobe University.
       • Takashi Kamihigashi & Kerim Keskin & Çağrı Sağlam, 2021. "Organizational refinements of Nash equilibrium," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 91(3), pages 289-312, October.
    2. Crettez, Bertrand & Nessah, Rabia, 2020. "On the existence of unilateral support equilibrium," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 41-47.

20. Ashlagi, Itai & Karagözoğlu, Emin & Klaus, Bettina, 2012. "A non-cooperative support for equal division in estate division problems," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 63(3), pages 228-233.
    • Itai Ashlagi & Emin Karagozoglu & Bettina Klaus, 2008. "A Noncooperative Support for Equal Division in Estate Division Problems," Harvard Business School Working Papers 09-069, Harvard Business School.
    See citations under working paper version above.
21. János Flesch & Emin Karagözoǧlu & Andrés Perea, 2009. "Optimal search for a moving target with the option to wait," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 56(6), pages 526-539, September.
    • Flesch, J. & Karagozoglu, E. & Perea ý Monsuwé, A., 2007. "Optimal search for a moving target with the option to wait," Research Memorandum 051, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    See citations under working paper version above.

Chapters

Sorry, no citations of chapters recorded.

Books

Sorry, no citations of books recorded.

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 13 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-GTH: Game Theory (9) 2008-02-02 2008-09-29 2008-12-01 2010-06-11 2010-07-31 2016-04-04 2020-03-09 2020-03-16 2020-03-16. Author is listed
2. NEP-EXP: Experimental Economics (4) 2010-07-31 2010-09-11 2015-08-25 2016-04-04
3. NEP-MIC: Microeconomics (3) 2008-12-01 2020-03-09 2020-03-16
4. NEP-ORE: Operations Research (3) 2020-03-09 2020-03-16 2021-01-18
5. NEP-CBE: Cognitive and Behavioural Economics (2) 2010-03-20 2016-04-04
6. NEP-HRM: Human Capital and Human Resource Management (2) 2015-08-25 2020-03-09
7. NEP-NEU: Neuroeconomics (2) 2010-03-20 2015-08-25
8. NEP-SPO: Sports and Economics (2) 2020-03-09 2021-01-18
9. NEP-BEC: Business Economics (1) 2015-08-25
10. NEP-CTA: Contract Theory and Applications (1) 2020-03-16
11. NEP-EVO: Evolutionary Economics (1) 2010-09-11
12. NEP-HPE: History and Philosophy of Economics (1) 2010-09-11
13. NEP-POL: Positive Political Economics (1) 2010-09-11

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, Emin Karagozoglu
(Emin Karagozoglu) 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.