IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/r/eee/ecolet/v88y2005i1p101-107.html
   My bibliography  Save this item

Loss avoidance as selection principle: Evidence from simple stag-hunt games

Citations

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


Cited by:

  1. Giovanna Devetag & Andreas Ortmann, 2007. "When and why? A critical survey on coordination failure in the laboratory," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(3), pages 331-344, September.
  2. Rydval, Ondrej & Ortmann, Andreas, 2005. "Loss avoidance as selection principle: Evidence from simple stag-hunt games," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 88(1), pages 101-107, July.
  3. Filipe Costa Souza & Leandro Chaves Rêgo, 2014. "Mixed Equilibrium, Collaborative Dominance and Burning Money: An Experimental Study," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 377-400, May.
  4. Bolle, Friedel & Spiller, Jörg, 2016. "Not efficient but payoff dominant: Experimental investigations of equilibrium play in binary threshold public good games," Discussion Papers 379, European University Viadrina Frankfurt (Oder), Department of Business Administration and Economics.
  5. Giovanna Devetag & Andreas Ortmann, 2010. "Classic coordination failures revisited: the effects of deviation costs and loss avoidance," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 30(2), pages 1633-1641.
  6. Bolton Gary E. & Feldhaus Christoph & Ockenfels Axel, 2016. "Social Interaction Promotes Risk Taking in a Stag Hunt Game," German Economic Review, De Gruyter, vol. 17(3), pages 409-423, August.
  7. Casari, Marco & Cason, Timothy N., 2013. "Explicit versus implicit contracts for dividing the benefits of cooperation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 20-34.
  8. Poulsen, Odile & Saral, Krista J., 2018. "Coordination and focality under gain–loss framing: Experimental evidence," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 75-78.
  9. Trautmann, Stefan T. & Vlahu, Razvan, 2013. "Strategic loan defaults and coordination: An experimental analysis," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 747-760.
  10. Werner Güth & Manfred Stadler & Alexandra Zaby, 2019. "Coordination Failure in Capacity-then-Price-Setting Games," Homo Oeconomicus: Journal of Behavioral and Institutional Economics, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 111-133, December.
  11. Friedel Bolle, 2014. "Revenue Equivalence of the Volunteer’s Dilemma and the Stag Hunt Game and Inferiority of Intermediate Thresholds," Discussion Paper Series RECAP15 13, RECAP15, European University Viadrina, Frankfurt (Oder).
  12. Brown, Martin & Trautmann, Stefan T. & Vlahu, Razvan, 2012. "Contagious Bank Runs: Experimental Evidence," Working Papers on Finance 1207, University of St. Gallen, School of Finance.
  13. Francesco Feri & Bernd Irlenbusch & Matthias Sutter, 2010. "Efficiency Gains from Team-Based Coordination—Large-Scale Experimental Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(4), pages 1892-1912, September.
  14. Friedel Bolle & Philipp E. Otto, 2022. "The flip side of power," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 190(1), pages 75-92, January.
  15. Friedel Bolle & Jörg Spiller, 2021. "Cooperation against all predictions," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(3), pages 904-924, July.
  16. Jonathan W. Leland, 2006. "Equilibrium Selection, Similarity Judgments and the "Nothing to Gain/Nothing to Lose" Effect," CEEL Working Papers 0604, Cognitive and Experimental Economics Laboratory, Department of Economics, University of Trento, Italia.
  17. Riyanto, Yohanes E. & Teh, Tat-How, 2020. "Highly flexible neighborhood promotes efficient coordination: Experimental evidence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
  18. Capraro, Valerio & Rodriguez-Lara, Ismael & Ruiz-Martos, Maria J., 2020. "Preferences for efficiency, rather than preferences for morality, drive cooperation in the one-shot Stag-Hunt game," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
  19. Susanne Büchner & Werner Güth & Luis M. Miller, 2005. "Conventions for Selecting Among Conventions - An Evolutionary and Experimental Analysis," Papers on Strategic Interaction 2005-21, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group.
  20. Parravano, Melanie & Poulsen, Odile, 2015. "Stake size and the power of focal points in coordination games: Experimental evidence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 191-199.
  21. Bolle, Friedel, 2017. "A behavioral theory of equilibrium selection," Discussion Papers 392, European University Viadrina Frankfurt (Oder), Department of Business Administration and Economics.
  22. Sawa, Ryoji & Wu, Jiabin, 2018. "Reference-dependent preferences, super-dominance and stochastic stability," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 96-104.
  23. Sawa, Ryoji & Wu, Jiabin, 2018. "Prospect dynamics and loss dominance," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 98-124.
  24. Ryan Kendall, 2022. "Decomposing coordination failure in stag hunt games," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(4), pages 1109-1145, September.
  25. Jörg Spiller & Friedel Bolle, 2017. "Experimental investigations of coordination games: high success rates, invariant behavior, and surprising dynamics," Discussion Paper Series RECAP15 28, RECAP15, European University Viadrina, Frankfurt (Oder).
  26. Spiller, Jörg & Bolle, Friedel, 2017. "Experimental investigations of binary threshold public good games," Discussion Papers 393, European University Viadrina Frankfurt (Oder), Department of Business Administration and Economics.
  27. Martin Brown & Stefan T. Trautmann & Razvan Vlahu, 2017. "Understanding Bank-Run Contagion," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(7), pages 2272-2282, July.
  28. Yuanji Wen & Stijn Masschelein & Anmol Ratan, 2022. "Loss aversion in asymmetric anti‐coordination games," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 88(4), pages 1549-1573, April.
  29. Buchheit, Steve & Feltovich, Nick, 2010. "Experimental evidence of a sunk–cost paradox: a study of pricing behavior in Bertrand–Edgeworth duopoly," SIRE Discussion Papers 2010-124, Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE).
  30. Ellingsen, Tore & Johannesson, Magnus & Mollerstrom, Johanna & Munkhammar, Sara, 2012. "Social framing effects: Preferences or beliefs?," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 117-130.
  31. Martens, Nikolai & Orzen, Henrik, 2021. "Escalating commitment to a failing course of action — A re-examination," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
  32. Ananish Chaudhuri & Chenan Zhou & Parapin Prak & Laura Bangun, 2006. "Common and almost common knowledge of credible assignments in a coordination game," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 3(1), pages 1-10.
  33. Feltovich, Nick & Iwasaki, Atsushi & Oda, Sobei H., 2010. "Payoff levels, loss avoidance, and equilibrium selection in the Stag Hunt: an experimental study," SIRE Discussion Papers 2010-125, Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE).
  34. Friedel Bolle, 2014. "Binary Threshold Public Goods," Discussion Paper Series RECAP15 14, RECAP15, European University Viadrina, Frankfurt (Oder).
  35. Trautmann, Stefan T. & Vlahu, Razvan, 2013. "Strategic loan defaults and coordination: An experimental analysis," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 747-760.
  36. Nick Feltovich, 2011. "The Effect of Subtracting a Constant from all Payoffs in a Hawk‐Dove Game: Experimental Evidence of Loss Aversion in Strategic Behavior," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 77(4), pages 814-826, April.
  37. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:3:y:2006:i:1:p:1-10 is not listed on IDEAS
  38. Susanne Büchner & Werner Güth & Luis Miller, 2011. "Individually selecting among conventions - an evolutionary and experimental analysis," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 285-301, May.
  39. Dugar, Subhasish & Shahriar, Quazi, 2018. "Restricted and free-form cheap-talk and the scope for efficient coordination," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 294-310.
IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.