Book contents
- Humanomics
- Cambridge Studies in Economics, Choice, and Society
- Humanomics
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- Cover Art Note
- Note on the Text
- 1 Humanomics Spans the Two Worlds of Adam Smith
- 2 Words and Meaning in Adam Smith’s World
- 3 Conduct in the Social Universe
- 4 Frank Knight Preemptively Settles the Horse Race
- 5 Axioms and Principles for Understanding Human Conduct
- 6 Propositions Predicting Context-Specific Action
- 7 Propriety and Sympathy in a Rule-Governed Order
- 8 Trust Game Discoveries
- 9 The Ultimatum Game as Involuntary Extortion
- 10 Designing, Predicting, and Evaluating New Trust Games
- 11 Reconsidering the Formal Structure of Traditional Game Theory
- 12 Narratives in and about Experimental Economics
- 13 Adam Smith’s Program for the Study of Human Socioeconomic Betterment
- Index
- References
9 - The Ultimatum Game as Involuntary Extortion
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 04 January 2019
Book contents
- Humanomics
- Cambridge Studies in Economics, Choice, and Society
- Humanomics
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- Cover Art Note
- Note on the Text
- 1 Humanomics Spans the Two Worlds of Adam Smith
- 2 Words and Meaning in Adam Smith’s World
- 3 Conduct in the Social Universe
- 4 Frank Knight Preemptively Settles the Horse Race
- 5 Axioms and Principles for Understanding Human Conduct
- 6 Propositions Predicting Context-Specific Action
- 7 Propriety and Sympathy in a Rule-Governed Order
- 8 Trust Game Discoveries
- 9 The Ultimatum Game as Involuntary Extortion
- 10 Designing, Predicting, and Evaluating New Trust Games
- 11 Reconsidering the Formal Structure of Traditional Game Theory
- 12 Narratives in and about Experimental Economics
- 13 Adam Smith’s Program for the Study of Human Socioeconomic Betterment
- Index
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- HumanomicsMoral Sentiments and the Wealth of Nations for the Twenty-First Century, pp. 127 - 142Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2019
References
Buchan, Nancy, Croson, Rachel, Johnson, Eric, and George, Wu. 2005. “Gain and Loss Ultimatums,” in Advances in Behavioral and Experimental Economics, Morgan, John (ed.). San Diego, CA: Elsevier, 1–24.Google Scholar
Camerer, Colin F. 2003. Behavioral Game Theory. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Cherry, Todd L., Frykblom, Peter, and Shogren, Jason F.. 2002. “Hardnose the Dictator,” American Economic Review 92(4): 1218–21.Google Scholar
Ellsberg, Daniel. 1956. “Theory of the Reluctant Duelist,” American Economic Review 46(5): 909–23.Google Scholar
Falk, Armin, Fehr, Ernst and Fischbacher, Urs. 2003. “On the Nature of Fair Behavior,” Economic Inquiry 41 (1): 20–26.Google Scholar
Fehr, Ernst and Fischbacher, Urs. 2002. “Why Social Preferences Matter – The Impact of Non-Selfish Motives on Competition, Cooperation and Incentives,” Economic Journal 112 (478) Conference Papers, pp. C1–C33.Google Scholar
Forsythe, Robert, Horowitz, Joel L., Savin, N. E., and Sefton, Martin. 1994. “Fairness in Simple Bargaining Experiments,” Games and Economic Behavior 6(3): 347–69.Google Scholar
Fouraker, Lawrence and Siegel, Sidney. 1962. Bargaining Behavior. New York, NY: McGrawHill.Google Scholar
Güth, Werner and Kocher, Martin G.. 2014. “More than Thirty Years of Ultimatum Bargaining Experiments: Motives, Variations, and a Survey of the Recent Literature,” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 108: 396–409.Google Scholar
Güth, Werner, Schmittberger, Rolf, and Schwarze, Bernd. 1982. “An Experimental Analysis of Ultimatum Bargaining,” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 3(4): 367–88.Google Scholar
Hoffman, Elizabeth, McCabe, Kevin and Smith, Vernon L.. 1996. “On Expectations and the Monetary Stakes in Ultimatum Games,” International Journal of Game Theory 25(3): 289–301.Google Scholar
Knight, Simon J. G. 2012. “Fairness or Anger in Ultimatum Game Rejections?” Journal of European Psychology Students 3: 2–14.Google Scholar
List, John A. and Cherry, Todd L.. 2000. “Learning to Accept in Ultimatum Games: Evidence from an Experimental Design that Generates Low Offers,” Experimental Economics 3: 11–29.Google Scholar
O’Connor, , Carsten, Kathleen M. De Dreu, K.W., Schroth, Holly, Barry, Bruce, Lituchy, Terri R., and Bazerman, Max H.. 2002. “What We Want to Do Versus What We Think We Should Do: An Empirical Investigation of Intrapersonal Conflict,” Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 15(5): 403–18.Google Scholar
Oxoby, Robert J. and Spraggon, John. 2008. “Mine and Yours: Property Rights in Dictator Games,” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 65(3–4): 703–13.Google Scholar
Pecorino, Paul and Mark, Van Boening. 2010. “Fairness in an Embedded Ultimatum Game,” Journal of Law and Economics 53: 263–87.Google Scholar
Pillutla, Madan M. and Murnighan, J. Keith. 1996. “Unfairness, Anger, and Spite: Emotional Rejections of Ultimatum Offers,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 68(3): 208–24.Google Scholar
Salmon, Timothy C. and Wilson, Bart J.. 2008. “Second Chance Offers Versus Sequential Auctions: Theory and Behavior,” Economic Theory 34: 47–67.Google Scholar
Sanfey, Alan G., Rilling, James K., Aronson, Jessica A., Nystrom, Leigh E., and Cohen, Jonathan D.. 2003. “The Neural Basis of Economic Decision-making in the Ultimatum Game,” Science 300(13): 1755–58.Google Scholar
Smith, Adam. 1853 [1759]. The Theory of Moral Sentiments; or, An Essay towards an Analysis of the Principles by which Men naturally judge concerning the Conduct and Character, first of their Neighbours, and afterwards of themselves. To which is added, A Dissertation on the Origins of Languages. New Edition. With a biographical and critical Memoir of the Author, by Dugald Stewart. London, UK: Henry G. Bohn. Available online and in electronic formats at http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/2620.Google Scholar
Smith, Vernon L. and Wilson, Bart J.. 2017. “Sentiments, Conduct, and Trust in the Laboratory,” Social Philosophy and Policy 34(1): 25–55.Google Scholar
van’t Wout, Mascha, Kahn, René S., Sanfey, Alan G., and Aleman, André. 2006. “Affective State and Decision-Making in the Ultimatum Game,” Experimental Brain Research 169(4): 564–68.Google Scholar
Xiao, Erte and Houser, Daniel. 2005. “Emotion Expression in Human Punishment Behavior,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 102(20): 7398–401.Google Scholar