Fairness in bargaining
By Yoella Bereby-Meyer, Muriel Niederle. 2005
116 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Safety Research
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e97beb7cb8ba3454bda700abd0f462c8bc9826a0
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Economics and Econometrics
In Safety Research
- Eric van Dijk
- Ernesto Reuben
- David de Cremer
- Michel J. J. Handgraaf
- Frans van Winden
- D. van Knippenberg
- P. V. van Lange
- Daniel Balliet
Citations in the corpus
- More than Thirty Years of Ultimatum Bargaining Experiments: Motives, Variations, and a Survey of the Recent Literature (2013, unknown): “Bereby-Meyer and Niederle (2005) use a three-person”
- Social value orientations and the strategic use of fairness in ultimatum bargaining (2004, background): “…& Murnighan, 1995; Roth & Malouf, 1979; Roth & Murnighan, 1982; Straub & Murnighan, 1995) have led researchers (e.g., Camerer & Thaler, 1995; Pillutla & Murnighan, 2003) to conclude that what has generally been interpreted as fair behavior in the traditional ultimatum game may in fact have…”
- Rankings, Standards, and Competition: Task vs. Scale Comparisons (2007, unknown): “…fairness-oriented concerns for equality (e.g., De Dreu & Boles,1998; Mclean Parks, Boles, Conlon, DeSousa, Gatewood, Gibson, Halpersn, Locke, Staub, Wilson, & Murnighan, 1996; Pillutla & Murnighan, 2003), when faced with the choice between an equal payoff versus a disadvantageously unequal one.”
- Social ties and coordination on negative reciprocity: The role of affect (2008, methodology): “For instance, various authors have conducted experiments using ultimatum games that involve an inactive dummy player (Güth and van Damme, 1998; Kagel and Wolfe, 2001; Bereby-Meyer and Niederle, 2005).”
- Fairness and the Willingness to Accept Plea Bargain Offers (2010, unknown): “30 More recent experimental evidence suggests that other negative emotions beyond pure fairness concerns contribute to recipients' aversion to comparatively disadvantageous outcomes and their preference for comparatively advantageous ones (e.g. Pillutla and Murnighan 1996; Pillutla and Murnighan 200”