When agents search for partners, the outcome is a matching. K. Eriksson and O. Häggström (2008) defined a measure of instability of matchings and proved that under a certain partner search heuristic, outcomes are likely to have low instability. They also showed that with regards to stability, the preference structure known as common preferences lie somewhere in between the extreme cases of homotypic and antithetical preferences. Following up on this theoretical work, we let human subjects search for a good partner in a computer game where preferences were set to be either common, homotypic, or antithetical. We find that total search effort and instability of the outcome vary in the predicted ways with the preference structure and the number of agents. A set of simulations show that these results are consistent with a model where agents use a simple search heuristic with a slight possibility of error.
Alpern, S., & Reyniers, D. ( 1999). Strategic mating with homotypic preferences. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 198, 71-88.
2.
Alpern, S., & Reyniers, D. ( 2005). Strategic mating with common preferences. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 237, 337-354.
3.
Beatty, S.E., & Smith, S.M. ( 1987). External search effort: An investigation across several product categories. Journal of Consumer Research, 14, 83-95.
4.
Bergstrom, C.T., & Real, L.A. ( 2000). Towards a theory of mutual mate choice: Lessons from two-sided matching. Evolutionary Ecology Research, 2, 493-508.
5.
Billari, F.C. ( 2000). Searching for mates using "fast and frugal" heuristics: A demographic perspective. In G. Ballot & G. Weisbuch (Eds.), Applications of simulation to social sciences(pp. 53-65). Oxford: Hermes Science.
6.
Chapdelaine, A., Kenny, D.A., & LaFontana, K.M. (1994). Matchmaker, matchmaker, can you make me a match? Predicting liking between two unacquainted persons . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 83- 91.
7.
Eastwick, P.W., Finkel, E.J., Mochon, D., & Ariely, D. ( 2007). Selective versus unselective romantic desire: Not all reciprocity is created equal. Psychological Science, 18, 317-319.
8.
Eriksson, K., & Häggström, O. (2008). Instability of matchings in decentralized markets with various preference structures. International Journal of Game Theory, 36, 409- 420.
9.
Eriksson, K., Sjöstrand, J., & Strimling, P. ( 2008). Asymmetric equilibria in dynamic two-sided matching markets with independent preferences. International Journal of Game Theory, 36, 421-440.
Finkel, E.J., Eastwick, P.W., & Matthews, J. ( 2007). Speed-dating as an invaluable tool for studying romantic attraction: A methodological primer. Personal Relationships , 14, 149-166.
12.
Gale, D., & Shapley, L. ( 1962). College admissions and the stability of marriage. American Mathematical Monthly, 69, 9-15.
13.
Goode, W.J. ( 1993). World changes in divorce patterns. New Haven: Yale University Press.
14.
Heaton, T.B., Cammack, M., & Young, L. ( 2003). Why is the divorce rate declining in Indonesia? Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 480-490.
15.
Hills, T.T., & Todd, P.M. ( 2008). Population heterogeneity and individual differences in an assortative agent-based marriage and divorce model (MADAM) with relaxing expectations. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation , 11, 5.
16.
Johnstone, R.A. ( 1997). The tactics of mutual mate choice and competitive search . Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 40, 51-59.
17.
Kalick, S.M., & Hamilton, T.E. (1986). The matching hypothesis reexamined. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(4), 673-682.
18.
Kenny, D.A. ( 1994). Interpersonal perception: A social relations analysis . New York: Guilford.
19.
Lenton, A.P., Fasolo, B., & Todd, P.M. ( 2008). `Shopping’ for a mate: Expected versus experienced preferences in online mate choice. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 51, 169-182.
20.
Lenton, A.P., Fasolo, B., & Todd, P.M. ( 2009). The relationship between number of potential mates and mating skew in humans. Animal Behaviour, 77, 55-60.
21.
Niederle, M., & Roth, A.E. ( 2004). Market culture: How norms governing exploding offers affect market performance. NBER Working Paper No. W10256, National Bureau of Economic Research (Cambridge, MA, USA).
22.
Ostrom, E. ( 1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. New York: Cambridge University Press.
23.
Pennebaker, J.W., Dyer, M.A., Caulkins, R.S., Litowitz, D.L., Ackreman, P.L., Anderson, D.B., & McGraw, K.M. (1979). Don’t the girls get prettier at closing time: A country and western application to psychology . Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 5, 122-125.
24.
Roth, A.E. ( 1991). A natural experiment in the organization of entry-level labor markets: Regional markets for new physicians and surgeons in the United Kingdom. American Economic Review, 81, 415-440.
25.
Roth, A.E., & Sotomayor, M.A.O. (1990). Two-sided matching. New York: Cambridge University Press.
26.
Roth, A.E., & Xing, X. ( 1997). Turnaround time and bottlenecks in market clearing: Decentralized matching in the market for clinical psychologists. Journal of Political Economy, 105, 284-329.
27.
Simão, J., & Todd, P.M. ( 2002). Modeling mate choice in monogamous mating systems with courtship. Adaptive Behavior, 10, 113-136.
28.
Simão, J., & Todd, P.M. ( 2003). Emergent patterns of mate choice in human populations . Artificial Life, 9, 403-417.
29.
Smith, V.L. ( 2000). Bargaining and market behavior: Essays in experimental economics. New York: Cambridge University Press
30.
Todd, P.M. ( 1997). Searching for the next best mate. In R. Conte, R. Hegselmann , & P. Terna (Eds.), Simulating social phenomena (pp. 419-436). Berlin, Springer-Verlag.
31.
Todd, P.M., & Miller, G.F. ( 1999). From pride and prejudice to persuasion: Satisficing in mate search. In G. Gigerenzer & P. M. Todd (Eds.), Simple heuristics that make us smart (pp. 287-308). Oxford University Press.
32.
Todd, P.M., Billari, F.C., & Simão, J. (2005). Aggregate age-at-marriage patterns from individual mate-search heuristics. Demography , 42, 559-574.
33.
Ünver, M.U. ( 2005). On the survival of some unstable two-sided matching mechanisms . International Journal of Game Theory, 33, 239-254.
