IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cer/papers/wp194.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

What Students Expect and What They See: Ideology, Identity and the Double Auction Classroom Experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew Austin
  • Nathaniel T. Wilcox

Abstract

Many economists find that classroom experiments using the Double Auction (DA) trading institution are an effective pedagogical tool in introductory economics classes. Results of such experiments reliably illustrate the concepts and descriptive relevance of the theory of competitive equilibrium (or CE). However, we have noticed that the degree to which students are "surprised" by the CE theory's ability to predict DA outcomes seems to vary from class to class, and especially across classes at markedly different universities. We speculate that this is due to differences in students' ideological leanings and that these, in turn, are related to various socioeconomic or "identity" variables, such as class and race, that may vary systematically across universities. This paper reports some initial experimental results that explore this hypothesis. We find that only a few socioeconomic variables significantly predict students' ideology, and that at least one measure of ideology is a robust predictor of students' prior expectations and posterior evaluations of the predictive performance of CE theory. Several other variables, including sex, union status and work experience, also help predict students' expectations or evaluations; but none of these is as strong or robust as ideology itself.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew Austin & Nathaniel T. Wilcox, 2002. "What Students Expect and What They See: Ideology, Identity and the Double Auction Classroom Experiment," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp194, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
  • Handle: RePEc:cer:papers:wp194
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.cerge-ei.cz/pdf/wp/Wp194.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Van Boening, Mark V & Wilcox, Nathaniel T, 1996. "Avoidable Cost: Ride a Double Auction Roller Coaster," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(3), pages 461-477, June.
    2. Ortmann, Andreas & Tichy, Lisa K., 1999. "Gender differences in the laboratory: evidence from prisoner's dilemma games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 327-339, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Andrew Austin & Nathaniel T. Wilcox, 2004. "Believing in Economic Theory: Sex, Lies, Evidence, Trust and Ideology," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp238, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
    2. D. Andrew Austin & Nathaniel T. Wilcox, 2007. "Believing In Economic Theories: Sex, Lies, Evidence, Trust, And Ideology," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 45(3), pages 502-518, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Araoz, Veronica & Jörnsten, Kurt, 2011. "Semi-Lagrangean approach for price discovery in markets with non-convexities," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 214(2), pages 411-417, October.
    2. Bruno S. Frey & Stephan Meier, "undated". "Pro-Social Behavior, Reciprocity or Both?," IEW - Working Papers 107, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    3. Schwieren, Christiane & Sutter, Matthias, 2008. "Trust in cooperation or ability? An experimental study on gender differences," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 99(3), pages 494-497, June.
    4. Ainhoa Jaramillo Gutiérrez & Nikolaos Georgantzis & Aurora García Gallego & Miguel Ginés Vilar, 2007. "Cultural And Risk-Related Determinants Of Gender Differences In Ultimatum Bargaining," Working Papers. Serie AD 2007-08, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
    5. SeEun Jung & Radu Vranceanu, 2017. "Gender Interaction in Teams: Experimental Evidence on Performance and Punishment Behavior," Korean Economic Review, Korean Economic Association, vol. 33, pages 95-126.
    6. Elmaghraby, Wedad J. & Larson, Nathan, 2012. "Explaining deviations from equilibrium in auctions with avoidable fixed costs," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 131-159.
    7. Andrew Austin & Tatyana Kosyaeva & Nathaniel Wilcox, 2005. "Believe but Verify? Russian Views and the Market," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp278, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
    8. Lex Borghans & Bas ter Weel & Bruce A. Weinberg, 2008. "Interpersonal Styles and Labor Market Outcomes," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 43(4).
    9. Haucap, Justus & Heldman, Christina & Rau, Holger A., 2024. "Gender and cooperation in the presence of negative externalities," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 148-169.
    10. KAUFMANN, Wesley & VAN WITTELOOSTUIJN, Arjen & BOONE, Christophe, 2009. "Colorful economics: Seeing red in a prisoner's dilemma game," ACED Working Papers 2009007, University of Antwerp, Faculty of Business and Economics.
    11. Borghans, L. & Golsteyn, B.H.H., 2007. "Are courses chosen to reduce skill-deficiencies? an experimental approach," ROA Research Memorandum 001, Maastricht University, Research Centre for Education and the Labour Market (ROA).
    12. Boschini, Anne & Muren, Astri & Persson, Mats, 2012. "Constructing gender differences in the economics lab," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(3), pages 741-752.
    13. Kyle Hampton & Katerina Sherstyuk, 2012. "Demand shocks, capacity coordination, and industry performance: lessons from an economic laboratory," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 43(1), pages 139-166, March.
    14. Hasan, Hamid & Ejaz, Nauman, 2013. "Testing for Differences across Genders: A Replication of Ultimatum Game at International Islamic University, Islamabad," MPRA Paper 44923, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Kjell Hausken & Andreas Ortmann, 2007. "A first experimental test of multilevel game theory: the PD case," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(4), pages 261-264.
    16. Cason, Timothy N. & Gangadharan, Lata & Duke, Charlotte, 2003. "Market power in tradable emission markets: a laboratory testbed for emission trading in Port Phillip Bay, Victoria," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 469-491, October.
    17. Ivanova-Stenzel, Radosveta & Kübler, Dorothea, 2011. "Gender differences in team work and team competition," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 797-808.
    18. Marie-Laure Cabon-Dhersin & Nathalie Etchart-Vincent, 2013. "Cooperation: The Power Of A Single Word? Some Experimental Evidence On Wording And Gender Effects In A Game Of Chicken," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65(1), pages 43-64, January.
    19. M Perugini & J H W Tan & D J Zizzo, 2010. "Which is the More Predictable Gender? Public Good Contribution and Personality," Economic Issues Journal Articles, Economic Issues, vol. 15(1), pages 83-110, March.
    20. Grosch, Kerstin & Rau, Holger A., 2017. "Gender differences in honesty: The role of social value orientation," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 258-267.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cer:papers:wp194. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Lucie Vasiljevova (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eiacacz.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.