We experimentally test whether impartial deliberation leads to stronger concern for
fairness in bargaining. In the experiment a seller can invest some of his/her time
in order to generate potential gains from trade with a buyer. Conditional on
investment the seller proposes how to split the gain. The buyer either accepts or
rejects the seller’s offer. To vary the degree of impartiality, subjects
are assigned to their roles as sellers or buyers either before (the
‘subjective group’) or after (the ‘objective
group’) they read the instructions. We find that the relationship between
the perceived investment cost and the bargaining proposal is significantly stronger
in the objective group. This suggests that sellers in the objective group are more
preoccupied with setting a fair price.
Babcock, L.
and
G. Loewenstein
. 1997.
‘Explaining Bargaining Impasse: The Role of Self-Serving Biases.’Journal of Economic Perspectives11:
109-126
.
2.
Babcock, L.
,
G. Loewenstein
,
S. Issacharoff
and
C. Camerer
. 1995.
‘Biased Judgements of Fairness in Bargaining.’American Economic Review85:
1337-1343
.
3.
Babcock, L.
,
X. Wang
and
G. Loewenstein
. 1996.
‘Choosing the Wrong Pond: Social Comparisons in Negotiations that
Reflect a Self-Serving Bias.’Quarterly Journal of Economics111:
1-19
.
4.
Binmore, K.1994. Game Theory and the Social Contract, Volume 1: Playing
Fair.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
.
5.
Camerer, C.2003. Behavioral Game Theory.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press
.
6.
Cummings, R. G.
,
G. W. Harrison
and
E. E. Rutstrom
. 1995.
‘Homegrown Values and Hypothetical Surveys: Is the Dichotomous
Choice Approach Incentive-Compatible?’American Economic Review85:
260-266
.
7.
Cummings, R. G.
,
S. Elliott
,
G. W. Harrison
and
J. Murphy
. 1997.
‘Are Hypothetical Referenda Incentive Compatible?’Journal of Political Economy105:
609-621
.
8.
D’Agostino, R. B.
,
W. Chase
and
A. Belanger
. 1988.
‘The Appropriateness of Some Common Procedures for Testing the
Equality of Two Independent Binomial Populations.’American Statistician42:
198-202
.
9.
Ellingsen, T.
and
M. Johannesson
. 2004a.
‘Sunk Costs and Fairness in Incomplete Information Bargaining.’Games and Economic Behavior, in press.
10.
Ellingsen, T.
and
M. Johannesson
. 2004b. ‘Time is Not Money.’ Mimeo,
Department of Economics, Stockholm School of Economics
.
11.
Fehr, E.
and
K. M. Schmidt
. 1999.
‘A Theory of Fairness, Competition, and Cooperation.’Quarterly Journal of Economics114:
817-868
.
12.
Frohlich, N.
and
J. Oppenheimer
. 1992. Choosing Justice: An Experimental Approach to Ethical
Theory.
Berkeley, CA: University of California Press
.
13.
Gauthier, D.1986. Morals by Agreement.
Oxford: Oxford University Press
.
14.
Gachter, S.
and
A. Riedl
. 2004. ‘Moral Property Rights in Bargaining with
Infeasible Claims.’ Mimeo,
University of St. Gallen
.
15.
Harsanyi, J. C.1953.
‘Cardinal Utility in Welfare Economics and in the Theory of Risk-Taking.’Journal of Political Economy61:
434-435
.
16.
Harsanyi, J. C.1955.
‘Cardinal Welfare, Individualistic Ethics and Interpersonal
Comparisons of Utility.’Journal of Political Economy73:
309-321
.
17.
Johannesson, M.
and
U-G. Gerdtham
. 1996.
‘A Note on the Estimation of the Equity-Efficiency Trade-Off for QALYs.’Journal of Health Economics15:
359-368
.
18.
Johansson-Stenman, O.
,
F. Carlsson
and
D. Daruvala
. 2002.
‘Measuring Future Grandparents’ Preferences for
Equality and Relative Standing.’Economic Journal112:
362-383
.
19.
Johnson, P. E.1931.
‘An Experiment in Social Ethics.’International Journal of Ethics41:
204-221
.
20.
Kagel, J. H.
,
C. Kim
and
D. Moser
. 1996.
‘Fairness in Ultimatum Games with Asymmetric Information and
Asymmetric Payoffs.’Games and Economic Behavior13:
100-110
.
21.
Knez, M. J.
and
C. F. Camerer
. 1995.
‘Outside Options and Social Comparison in Three-Player Ultimatum
Game Experiments.’Games and Economic Behavior10:
65-94
.
22.
Konow, J.2000.
‘Fair Shares: Accountability and Cognitive Dissonance in
Allocation Decisions.’American Economic Review90:
1072-1091
.
23.
Loewenstein, G.
,
S. Issacharoff
,
C. Camerer
and
L. Babcock
. 1993.
‘Self-Serving Assessments of Fairness and Pretrial Bargaining.’Journal of Legal Studies22:
135-159
.
24.
Nagin, D. S.
,
J. B. Rebitzer
,
S. Sanders
and
L. J. Taylor
. 2002.
‘Monitoring, Motivation, and Management: The Determinants of
Opportunistic Behavior in a Field Experiment.’American Economic Review92:
850-873
.
25.
Rawls, J.1971. A Theory of Justice.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
.
26.
Roth, A. E.
and
J. K. Murnighan
. 1982.
‘The Role of Information in Bargaining: An Experimental Study.’Econometrica50:
1123-1142
.
27.
Thompson, L.
and
G. Loewenstein
. 1992.
‘Egocentric Interpretations of Fairness in Interpersonal Conflict.’Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes51:
176-197
.
28.
Vickrey, W. S.1945.
‘Measuring Marginal Utility by Reaction to Risk.’Econometrica13:
319-333
.
29.
Wade-Benzoni, K. A.
,
A. E. Tenbrunsel
and
M. H. Bazerman
. 1996.
‘Egocentric Interpretations of Fairness in Asymmetric,
Environmental Social Dilemmas: Explaining Harvesting Behavior and the Role
of Comunication.’Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes67:
111-126
.
