Asymmetric Guessing Games

This paper theoretically and experimentally investigates the behavior of asymmetric players in guessing games. The asymmetry is created by introducing k>1 replicas of one of the players. Two-player and restricted N-player cases are examined in detail. Based on the model parameters, the equilibrium is either unique in which all players choose zero or mixed in which the weak player (k=1) imitates the strong player (k>1). A series of experiments involving two and three-player repeated guessing games with unique equilibrium is conducted. We find that equilibrium behavior is observed less frequently and overall choices are farther from the equilibrium in two-player asymmetric games in contrast to symmetric games, but this is not the case in three-player games. Convergence towards equilibrium exists in all cases but asymmetry slows down the speed of convergence to the equilibrium in two, but not in three-player games. Furthermore, the strong players have a slight earning advantage over the weak players, and asymmetry increases discrepancy in choices (defined as the squared distance of choices from the winning number) in both games

TIME INCONSISTENCY AND LEARNING IN BARGAINING GAMES

The literature on time-inconsistent preferences introduced naive, partially naive and sophisticated as types of agents that represent different levels of unawareness of agents' self-control problems. This paper incorporates time-inconsistent players in a sequential bargaining model. We first consider 'naive' agents who never learn about their types and show that bargaining between such a player and a standard exponential agent ends in immediate agreement. The more naive a player, the higher his share. If naive agents can learn their type over time, we show that there is a critical date such that there is no agreement before that date. Hence, existence of time-inconsistent players who can learn as they play the game can be another explanation for delays in bargaining.Hyperbolic discounting, learning, bargaining, delay

Dishonesty, Social Information, and Sorting

The dishonesty literature investigates how people behave when they are provided certain types of information. However, this approach predominantly ignores the fact that people -to some extent- can choose which information they want to be exposed to. By conducting a laboratory experiment, we study individuals’ decisions to choose which social information they would like to observe and the effect of this sorting on their engagement in unethical conduct. We find evidence that sorting exacerbates the prevalence of dishonesty, which is mainly driven by the ones who chose maximum information. Our results demonstrate that sorting is an important factor determining dishonest behavior and that previously observed levels of prevalence of dishonesty in the literature can be an underestimate of actual level of dishonest behavior in real-world situations

Dishonesty, Social Information, and Sorting

The dishonesty literature investigates how people behave when they are provided certain types of information. However, this approach predominantly ignores the fact that people -to some extent- can choose which information they want to be exposed to. By conducting a laboratory experiment, we study individuals’ decisions to choose which social information they would like to observe and the effect of this sorting on their engagement in unethical conduct. We find evidence that sorting exacerbates the prevalence of dishonesty, which is mainly driven by the ones who chose maximum information. Our results demonstrate that sorting is an important factor determining dishonest behavior and that previously observed levels of prevalence of dishonesty in the literature can be an underestimate of actual level of dishonest behavior in real-world situations

Playing the victim behavior: An experimental study

This paper experimentally explores playing the victim behavior, how prevalent it is, its determinants, and potential mechanisms to mitigate it with a subject pool from two regions (UAE and North America). The possibility of playing the victim is introduced by letting some participants receive a negative shock to their initial endowments, after which they can apply for extra compensation even when they do not receive the shock. We fi�nd that the majority of participants play the victim. We then test whether defaults and signing an honesty oath influence this behavior. We �find, contrary to intuitions, that the omission treatments, where lying is a default, failed to increase misrepresentation, and if anything decreased it, while the oath substantially reduced it as expected. Moreover, the extent of pro-sociality and perceived social norms are found to be strongly related to playing the victim behavior. The findings are very similar across regions. Our findings offer some insights to design better policies to support victims, especially during crises such as the Covid-19 pandemic

Elicited Time Preferences and Behavior in Long-Run Projects

We study whether and how the experimentally elicited risk and time preferences of subjects are associated with their behavior in long-run projects. First, risk and time preferences are elicited from time-dated monetary choices to estimate a general discount and utility function at an individual level, then subjects work on a longitudinal project that requires effort in multiple periods. We find that present bias in the form of a fixed cost or variable cost (quasi-hyperbolic discounting) is not supported by monetary choices. Analyses of allocation patterns of work reveal that the estimated utility and discounting models are not compatible with the observed allocations. We find evidence of both present and future bias, although the former is more prevalent and severe, and subjects exhibit naivete in their choice reversals. Furthermore, discount rate and present bias parameters estimated based on monetary choices have predictive power on how work is allocated in the long-run project