Which of the following is a significant difference in the outcomes between the dictator game and the ultimatum game? Multiple Choice O Self-interest is revealed more strongly in the ultimatum game than in the dictator game. The ultimatum game tends to result in a more even split of the money. There is little difference, as fairness considerations lead to similar splits of the money in both games. The dictator game tends to result in a more even split of the money.

Which of the following is a significant difference in the outcomes between the dictator game and the ultimatum game? Multiple Choice O Self-interest is revealed more strongly in the ultimatum game than in the dictator game. The ultimatum game tends to result in a more even split of the money. There is little difference, as fairness considerations lead to similar splits of the money in both games. The dictator game tends to result in a more even split of the money.

Microeconomic Theory

12th Edition

ISBN:9781337517942

Author:NICHOLSON

Publisher:NICHOLSON

Chapter8: Game Theory

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 8.11P

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

Two players play the Ultimatum Game, in which they are to split $20. A purely rational agent would only reject an offer of … Group of answer choices... -$20 -$19 -$1 -$0 -$10
Two players play the Ultimatum Game, in which they are to split $20. A purely rational agent would only reject an offer of …
A principal can choose to make the allocation of tasks broad (B) or narrrow (N). At the same time an agent can choose to work put in high effort (H) or low effort (L). The payoffs are 20 to the principal and 30 to the agent is the actions chosen are B and L. For all other combinations of actions the payoffs are 0 to both players. Which of the following statements are true? DA Nash equilibrium of the game is (B, H) A Nash equilibrium is (N, L) There is no Nash equilibrium in pure strategies in this game. A Nash equilibrium is (N, H) A Nash equilibrium is (B, L)
Suppose players A and B play a discrete ultimatum game where A proposes to split a $5 surplus and B responds by either accepting the offer or rejecting it. The offer can only be made in $1 increments. If the offer is accepted, the players' payoffs resemble the terms of the offer while if the offer is rejected, both players get zero. Also assume that players always use the strategy that all strictly positive offers are accepted, but an offer of $0 is rejected. A. What is the solution to the game in terms of player strategies and payoffs? Explain or demonstrate your answer. B. Suppose the ultimatum game is played twice if player B rejects A's initial offer. If so, then B is allowed to make a counter offer to split the $5, and if A rejects, both players get zero dollars at the end of the second round. What is the solution to this bargaining game in terms of player strategies and payoffs? Explain/demonstrate your answer. C. Suppose the ultimatum game is played twice as in (B) but now there…
The chicken game has often been used to model crises. Recall that in this game, the two players drive straight at each other. They can choose to swerve or keep going straight. If one swerves, and the other goes straight, assume that the one that swerves gets -10 utility and the one that goes straight gets 10 utility, since the one that swerves is deemed the loser. If both swerve, both get 0 utility. If both go straight, they crash and get -50 utility. Assume both players have a discount rate of 0.9 Draw the stage game of date night List all pure strategy Nash equilibria of the single stage game Consider an infinite horizon version of Chicken. Can you get an SPNE in which the both players swerve using a grim trigger type strategy? Consider the following strategies: both players swerve, as long as neither ever went straight. If one player ever plays straight, in all subsequent rounds the player that swerved goes straight and the player that went straight swerves. Can you think…
In 'the dictator' game, one player (the dictator) chooses how to divide a pot of $10 between herself and another player (the recipient). The recipient does not have an opportunity to reject the proposed distribution. As such, if the dictator only cares about how much money she makes, she should keep all $10 for herself and give the recipient nothing. However, when economists conduct experiments with the dictator game, they find that dictators often offer strictly positive amounts to the recipients. Are dictators behaving irrationally in these experiments? Whether you think they are or not, your response should try to provide an explanation for the behavior.
Consider the game below with a worker (W) and a firm (F). The worker initially can choose to acquire skills or not acquire skills. If the worker does acquire skills, the firm then gets to decide whether to compensate the worker or not. The extensive form of the game and the payoffs are below. Which of the following is true? W Acquirre Not Acquire There is no Nash equilibrium. C Compensate Not Compensate This game has a single Nash equilibrium. There are two Nash equilibria. None of the above. (0,0) Both players have a strictly dominant strategy. (10,10) (-5,20)
Evaluate the following statement. “We shouldn’t generalize from what people do in the ultimatum game because $10 is a trivial amount of money. When larger amounts of money are on the line, people will act differently.”
Economics Consider the ultimatum and dictator games. a) Briefly explain the general experimental findings about how individuals play these games. How do they compare with the game theoretic predictions? b) How do social preferences explain behavior in these experiments? c) Real world experiences have an impact on experimental behavior. Explain how real world experiences could affect behavior in each of theses experiments. d) Suppose that you would like to increase the amount that is sent in these experiments. Can you think of a way to to this? e) Suppose that individuals play first a dictator game and then an ultimatum game with the roles reversed, i.e. the sender in the dictator game is the receiver in the ultimatum game. Given what you know about individuals' behavior, how do think that players will play? Explain. you
Assume that a proposer and a respondent are playing an ultimatum game where they split a pie of Rs. 100. What is the backward induction equilibrium of this game? In a laboratory experiment we see that offers from the proposer averaging Rs. 20 are routinely rejected by the respondent. Name one theory that has been used to offer an explanation for this observation. Using that theory what modifications of agent utility functions are needed for such outcomes as described above to be equilibrium?
Boris and Leo are playing an ultimatum bargaining game, with £1000 to share. Boris is the proposer. Suppose Leo has the following preferences: his utility in monetary terms is the amount of money he gets minus 40 percent of Boris's amount Which of the following statements is/are correct? a) If Leo's preferences change so that his utility in monetary terms were the amount of money he gets minus 100 percent of Boris's amount, his minimum acceptable offer would increase. b) The minimum offer Leo will accept is larger than £250. c) The description of Leo's preferences suggest that Leo is altruistic.
Q2. The Prisoners' Dilemma: Jill Confess Remain Silent Confess Bob: 8 years Jill: 8 years Bob: Free Jill: 20 years Bob Remain Silent Bob: 20 years Jill: Free Bob: 1 year Jill: 1 year 2A: Find Nash equilibrium? 28. Is the Nash equilibrium best outcome for them? 2C. If your answer of Q2 is 'No', then why they choose an outcome which is not best for them.