Ultimatum Game

Card Set Information

Author:
jdistefano92
ID:
269766
Filename:
Ultimatum Game
Updated:
2014-04-08 10:21:51
Tags:
ultimatum game tragedy commons
Folders:
conflict and cooperation
Description:
conflict and cooperation, ultimatum game
Show Answers:

Home > Flashcards > Print Preview

The flashcards below were created by user jdistefano92 on FreezingBlue Flashcards. What would you like to do?


  1. who created the ultimatum game
    ariel rubinstein
  2. what is the ultimatum game
    a game played in economic expts where two players interact to divide a sum of money between them. the first player proposes how to divide the sum of money and the second player can accept or reject the proposal. if they accept, the money is split, if they reject, neither get anything.
  3. What did Heinrich et al's behavioural experiments in 15 small scale societies find about the canonical assumption that individuals are entirely self interested?
    Mean offers in industrial societies were close to 44%, the offers in their sample ranged from 26%-58%. While modal offers are consistently 50% in industrialized societies, their samples varied 15-50%. In industrialised societies, offers below 20% are rejected with probability 0.4-0.6, rejections of low offers are v. rare in some groups. In other groups, there were substantial rejection rates, including rejections of offers over 50%.
  4. The first offer depended sig on two factors for which they ranked the societies, what were they
    • payoffs to cooperation- how imp and how large is a group's payoff from cooperation in economic production 
    • market integration- how much do people rely on market exchange in their daily lives
  5. PC and MI explained what % of the variance
    68%
  6. Why did the Lamelara have the highest first offers (58%) and the Machiguenga have the lowest (26%)?
    Lamelara go to see in 10 person canoes to hunt whales. the Machiguenga are almost entirely economically independent at family level and engage rarely in productive activities involving more than members of a family
  7. When hyper-fair (>50%) offers were rejected in some cases, what did Heinrich et al attribute this to
    reflected the culture of gift giving found in those societies. among those groups, accepting gifts commits one to reciprocate at some future time to be determined by the giver. receipt of large gifts also establishes one in a subordinate position. excessively large gifts will be refused because of the anxiety about the specific strings attached
  8. What did heinrich say  their data indicated?
    the degree of cooperation, sharing, and punishment exhibited by experimental subjects closely corresponds to templates for these behaviours in the subjects' daily lives. the variability is a result of the large between group differences in the structures of social interaction and modes of livelihood
  9. How did heinrich summarise their results
    • 1. canonical model isn't supported in any society studied 
    • 2. more behavioural variability across groups than had been found in previous cross cultural research and the canonical model fails in a wider variety of ways than in previous expts 
    • 3. group level differences in economic organisation and the degree of market integration explain substantial portion of the behavioural variation across societies- the higher the degree of market integration and the higher the payoffs to cooperation, the greater the level of cooperation in experimental games
    • 4. individual level economic and demographic variables dont explain behaviour either within or across groups 
    • 5. behaviour in the experiments is generally consistent w economic patterns of everyday life in these societies.
  10. What did researchers from the University of British Columbia find out about the western concept of fairness?
    It isn't the norm. i.e. they typically offer $50, reject offers below $40
  11. what did solnick 2001 do?
    explored the behaviour of men and women in the ultimatum game, in one treatment, players remained mutually anon. in second treatment, gender is common knowledge
  12. What did solnick 2001 find
    average offers dont differ based on gender of player 1. offers affected by gender 2, men attracted higher offers, especially from women. player 2 of both genders choose higher minimum acceptable offer when facing a female player 1. these patterns led to substantial differences in earnings.

What would you like to do?

Home > Flashcards > Print Preview