EBK INTERMEDIATE MICROECONOMICS AND ITS
12th Edition
ISBN: 9781305176386
Author: Snyder
Publisher: YUZU
expand_more
expand_more
format_list_bulleted
Question
Chapter 5.6, Problem 1.2TTA
To determine
Provide your method of building an experiment with regard to the Battle of the Sexes, and also provide any theoretical issues that you might find interesting in this experiment.
Expert Solution & Answer
Trending nowThis is a popular solution!
Students have asked these similar questions
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
How can you use surveys, experiments and observational studies to make inferences about apopulation?
18. Why could experiments be used to solve the endogeneity problem?
[answer in no more than 50 words]
Chapter 5 Solutions
EBK INTERMEDIATE MICROECONOMICS AND ITS
Ch. 5.3 - Prob. 1TTACh. 5.3 - Prob. 2TTACh. 5.4 - Prob. 1MQCh. 5.4 - Prob. 2MQCh. 5.4 - Prob. 3MQCh. 5.4 - Prob. 4MQCh. 5.5 - Prob. 1TTACh. 5.5 - Prob. 2TTACh. 5.5 - Prob. 1MQCh. 5.5 - Prob. 2MQ
Ch. 5.6 - Prob. 1TTACh. 5.6 - Prob. 2TTACh. 5.6 - Prob. 1MQCh. 5.6 - Prob. 2MQCh. 5.6 - Prob. 1.1TTACh. 5.6 - Prob. 1.2TTACh. 5.6 - Prob. 1.1MQCh. 5.6 - Prob. 1.2MQCh. 5.9 - Prob. 1MQCh. 5.9 - Prob. 2MQCh. 5.9 - Prob. 1TTACh. 5.9 - Prob. 2TTACh. 5 - Prob. 1RQCh. 5 - Prob. 2RQCh. 5 - Prob. 3RQCh. 5 - Prob. 4RQCh. 5 - Prob. 5RQCh. 5 - Prob. 6RQCh. 5 - Prob. 7RQCh. 5 - Prob. 8RQCh. 5 - Prob. 9RQCh. 5 - Prob. 10RQCh. 5 - Prob. 5.1PCh. 5 - Prob. 5.2PCh. 5 - Prob. 5.3PCh. 5 - Prob. 5.5PCh. 5 - Prob. 5.6PCh. 5 - Prob. 5.7PCh. 5 - Prob. 5.8PCh. 5 - Prob. 5.9PCh. 5 - Prob. 5.10P
Knowledge Booster
Similar questions
- One way of which has been proposed for sustaining high levels of contribution in voluntary contribution games is to allow participants to pay to punish free-riders. We believe that this is effective when A) Participants are not altruistic and so are willing to punish free riding. B) All of the other three statements are partial explanations, with participants being willing to punish free riding, potential free riders realising that adherence to the social norm is now the payoff maximising strategy, and the Nash equilibrium becoming adherence to the social norm. C) Participants who are tempted to reduce contributions anticipate future punishment and so conclude that they are better off maintaining contributions. D) Giving participants the ability to punish violation of a social norm means that adherence to the social norm becomes the Nash equilibrium of the game.arrow_forwardIn a standard economic model, we generally assume the individual only cares about their own payoff. So, for example, utility of individual i is given by u = pi, where pi is the individual’s payoff. Suppose the individual is playing a dictator game with another partner j. How would you modify the utility function to explain the non-zero allocations to the partner that are typically observed?arrow_forwardWhy is random assignment of participants to control and treatment groups a central feature oflab, social and field experiments?arrow_forward
- Consider the following statement: “I examined the statistics for our basketball team’s wins last year and found that, when the third team played more, the winning margin increased. If the coach played the third team more, we would win by a bigger margin.” Which of the following applies to this statement? This statement exemplifies the post hoc ergo propter hoc (“after this, therefore because of this”) fallacy, whereby association is confused with causation. This statement is correct because third teams always win by larger margins in basketball games. This statement is correct. If the coach had played the third team more often, the winning margin would have increased. The statement is logical and exhibits no fallacy.arrow_forwardWho detected the endowment effect first? Tell us about the design of the experiment and its main conclusions.arrow_forward(a) Consider the following games which are commonly used in laboratory exper- iments on social preferences. For each: describe the game, explain how the game would be played by selfish players and summarise the main findings from the experimental evidence. i. Dictator game ii. Ultimatum bargaining game iii. Trust game (b) Carefully comment on the figure below, which shows the percentage of third parties who punish in the dictator game and is taken from Fehr and Fischbacher (2004), "Third party punishment and social norms", Evolution and Human Behavior 25(2).. Percentage of punishers E. Fehr, U. Fischbacher/ Evolution and Human Behavior 25 (2004) 63-87 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 A percentage of third parties who punish --percentage of recipients who belief that third parties punish 0 10 20 30 Dictator's transfer to recipient Fig. 1. Percentage of third parties who punished in the dictator game. 40 50 (c) Explain why anonymity of the subjects is an important feature of public good…arrow_forward
- (a) Consider the following games which are commonly used in laboratory exper- iments on social preferences. For each: describe the game, explain how the game would be played by selfish players and summarise the main findings from the experimental evidence. i. Dictator game ii. Ultimatum bargaining game iii. Trust game (b) Carefully comment on the figure below, which shows the percentage of third parties who punish in the dictator game and is taken from Fehr and Fischbacher (2004), "Third party punishment and social norms", Evolution and Human Behavior 25(2). [10 marks] Percentage of punishers E. Fehr, U. Fischbacher/ Evolution and Human Behavior 25 (2004) 63-87 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 A percentage of third parties who punish --percentage of recipients who belief that third parties punish 0 10 20 30 Dictator's transfer to recipient Fig. 1. Percentage of third parties who punished in the dictator game. 40 50 (c) Explain why anonymity of the subjects is an important feature of…arrow_forwardTwo athletes of equal ability are competing for a prize of $10,000. Each is deciding whether to take a dangerous performance enhancing drug. If one athlete takes the drug, and the other does not, the one who takes the drug wins the prize. If both or neither take the drug, they tie and split the prize. Taking the drug imposes health risks that are equivalent to a loss of X dollars. a) Draw a 2×2 payoff matrix describing the decisions the athletes face. b) For what X is taking the drug the Nash equilibrium? c) Does making the drug safer (that is, lowering X) make the athletes better or worse off? Explain.arrow_forwardA "Prisoner's Dilemma" is a situation in which both parties: a) have an incentive to cooperate(meaning working with the other criminal by keeping one's mouth shut) even without communication b) have an incentive to not cooperate(meaning working with other criminal by keeping one's mouth shut) even through cooperation would be mutually benefical. c)have no incentives to cooperate or not cooperate because either way they lose.arrow_forward
- Two athletes of equal ability are competing for a prize of $12,000. Each is deciding whether to take a dangerous performance-enhancing drug. If one athlete takes the drug and the other does not, the one who takes the drug wins the prize. If both or neither take the drug, they tie and split the prize. Taking the drug imposes health risks that are equivalent to a loss of XX dollars. Complete the following payoff matrix describing the decisions the athletes face. Enter Player One's payoff on the left in each situation, Player Two's on the right. Player Two's Decision Take Drug Don't Take Drug Player One's Decision Take Drug , , Don't Take Drug , , True or False: The Nash equilibrium is taking the drug if X is greater than $6,000. True False Suppose there was a way to make the drug safer (that is, have lower XX). Which of the following statements are true about the effects of making the drug safer? Check all that…arrow_forwardQuestion 5 Consider an ultimatum game in which a Proposer offers a two-way split of $100 to two respondents. If either of the Responders accepts but not the other, that Responder and the Proposer get the split and the other Responder gets nothing. If no one accepts, no one gets anything, including the Proposer. If both Responders accept, one is chosen at random to receive the split. The following figure shows some laboratory evidence of this ultimatum game, with the proportion offered to the Responder on the horizontal axis. Based on this information, which of the following statements is correct? 100% One Responder 70% Two Responders 50% 10% 20% 10% ON ON SN 10% ASN 20% as 40 45s sos Fraction of offers rejectedarrow_forwardIn this version of the ultimatum game experiment, one participant is given £100, and is told to offer to split that amount with another participant. The second player can either refuse to accept the division, in which case the participant receiving the £100 has to give it back, or can accept the division, in which case, the player receiving the money splits the £100 as proposed. For the participant who has to accept or reject the offer A) The best strategy is to accept any offer which meets the social norm for fairness. B) The best strategy is to threaten to turn down any transfer of less than £100 to ensure that the person receiving the money makes a fair offer. C) There is a dominant strategy to accept any offer because gaining some money is better than gaining no money D) There is a dominant strategy to turn down any offer other than £50 because an unequal split would be unfair.arrow_forward
arrow_back_ios
SEE MORE QUESTIONS
arrow_forward_ios
Recommended textbooks for you
Economics (MindTap Course List)EconomicsISBN:9781337617383Author:Roger A. ArnoldPublisher:Cengage Learning
Economics (MindTap Course List)
Economics
ISBN:9781337617383
Author:Roger A. Arnold
Publisher:Cengage Learning