IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/dpr/wpaper/1229r.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Toward an Understanding of Dominated Bidding in a Vickrey Auction Experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Shigehiro Serizawa
  • Natsumi Shimada
  • Tiffany Tsz Kwan Tse

Abstract

This study explores two key factors influencing subjects’ deviation from dominant bidding in Vickrey auction experiments. The first factor examines subjects’ understanding of strategy-proofness (SP), while the second focuses on “human interaction” which includes social preferences (spite and altruism), responses to strategic uncertainty, and tacit collusion. To analyze the effect of understanding SP, we quiz subjects before an experimental Vickrey auction and examine whether their bidding behavior changes if one of the quizzes includes hints about SP. We design the quiz carefully, incorporating implicit hints about SP and ensuring the avoidance of explicit demands or advice to mitigate experimenter demand effects. However, completing the quiz enables the subjects to understand SP themselves. To analyze the effects of human interaction, we examine whether subjects’ bidding behavior changes if they compete against robots instead of human rivals in the auctions. We design 2 × 2 treatments by varying the type of quiz (with or without hints about SP) and the nature of the rivals (humans or robots). We found that the quiz with hints about SP increases dominant bidding. The nature of rivals also influences the bidding behavior; nonetheless, its impact is not as robust as that of SP hints. Thus, the main factor causing dominated bidding in Vickrey auction experiments is not human interaction but a lack of understanding of SP.

Suggested Citation

  • Shigehiro Serizawa & Natsumi Shimada & Tiffany Tsz Kwan Tse, 2024. "Toward an Understanding of Dominated Bidding in a Vickrey Auction Experiment," ISER Discussion Paper 1229r, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University, revised Apr 2024.
    • Handle: RePEc:dpr:wpaper:1229r
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.iser.osaka-u.ac.jp/library/dp/2024/DP1229R.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. DavidJ. Cooper & Hanming Fang, 2008. "Understanding Overbidding In Second Price Auctions: An Experimental Study," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(532), pages 1572-1595, October.
    2. Takehito Masuda & Ryo Mikami & Toyotaka Sakai & Shigehiro Serizawa & Takuma Wakayama, 2022. "The net effect of advice on strategy-proof mechanisms: an experiment for the Vickrey auction," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(3), pages 902-941, June.
    3. Takehito Masuda & Eungik Lee, 2019. "Higher order risk attitudes and prevention under different timings of loss," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(1), pages 197-215, March.
    4. Kobberling, Veronika & Wakker, Peter P., 2005. "An index of loss aversion," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 122(1), pages 119-131, May.
    5. Nobuyuki Hanaki & Keigo Inukai & Takehito Masuda & Yuta Shimodaira, 2022. "Comparing behavior between a large sample of smart students and a representative sample of Japanese adults," ISER Discussion Paper 1160, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. repec:dpr:wpaper:1229 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Nobuyuki Hanaki & Keigo Inukai & Takehito Masuda & Yuta Shimodaira, 2022. "Comparing behavior between a large sample of smart students and a representative sample of Japanese adults," ISER Discussion Paper 1160, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    3. Han Bleichrodt, 2022. "The prevention puzzle," The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 47(2), pages 277-297, September.
    4. Nobuyuki Hanaki & Keigo Inukai & Takehito Masuda & Yuta Shimodaira, 2021. "Participants’ Characteristics at ISER-Lab in 2020," ISER Discussion Paper 1141, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    5. Heiko Karle & Georg Kirchsteiger & Martin Peitz, 2015. "Loss Aversion and Consumption Choice: Theory and Experimental Evidence," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 7(2), pages 101-120, May.
    6. Martín Egozcue & Sébastien Massoni & Wing-Keung Wong & RiÄ ardas Zitikis, 2012. "Integration-segregation decisions under general value functions: "Create your own bundle — choose 1, 2, or all 3!"," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 12057, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    7. Botond Kőszegi & Matthew Rabin, 2006. "A Model of Reference-Dependent Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 121(4), pages 1133-1165.
    8. Bin Zou, 2017. "Optimal Investment In Hedge Funds Under Loss Aversion," International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Finance (IJTAF), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(03), pages 1-32, May.
    9. Luís Santos-Pinto & Adrian Bruhin & José Mata & Thomas Åstebro, 2015. "Detecting heterogeneous risk attitudes with mixed gambles," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 79(4), pages 573-600, December.
    10. Enrico G. De Giorgi & Thierry Post, 2011. "Loss Aversion with a State-Dependent Reference Point," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(6), pages 1094-1110, June.
    11. Christiane Ernst & Christian Thöni, 2013. "Bimodal Bidding in Experimental All-Pay Auctions," Games, MDPI, vol. 4(4), pages 1-16, October.
    12. Carpenter, Jeffrey & Matthews, Peter Hans & Tabb, Benjamin, 2016. "Progressive taxation in a tournament economy," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 64-72.
    13. Jianpei Li & Yi Xue & Weixing Wu, 2013. "Partnership dissolution and proprietary information," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 40(2), pages 495-527, February.
    14. Breitmoser, Yves, 2019. "Knowing me, imagining you: Projection and overbidding in auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 423-447.
    15. Cullis, John & Jones, Philip & Soliman, Amal, 2012. "‘Spite effects’ in tax evasion experiments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 418-423.
    16. Richard Peter, 2024. "The economics of self-protection," The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 49(1), pages 6-35, March.
    17. Edoardo GAFFEO & Ivan PETRELLA & Damjan PFAJFAR & Emiliano SANTORO, 2010. "Reference-dependent preferences and the transmission of monetary policy," Working Papers of Department of Economics, Leuven ces10.28, KU Leuven, Faculty of Economics and Business (FEB), Department of Economics, Leuven.
    18. Nicolas Jacquemet & Alexander James & Stéphane Luchini & Jason Shogren, 2011. "Social Psychology and Environmental Economics: A New Look at ex ante Corrections of Biased Preference Evaluation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(3), pages 413-433, March.
    19. Brandts, Jordi & El Baroudi, Sabrine & Huber, Stefanie J. & Rott, Christina, 2021. "Gender differences in private and public goal setting," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 192(C), pages 222-247.
    20. Johansson-Stenman, Olof, 2010. "Risk aversion and expected utility of consumption over time," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 208-219, January.
    21. Mark Isaac & Svetlana Pevnitskaya & Kurt S. Schnier, 2012. "Individual Behavior And Bidding Heterogeneity In Sealed Bid Auctions Where The Number Of Bidders Is Unknown," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 50(2), pages 516-533, April.

    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:dpr:wpaper:1229r. 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: Librarian (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/isosujp.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.