Alternating offers bargaining with loss aversion

The Rubinstein alternating offers bargaining game is reconsidered under the assumption that each player is loss averse and the associated reference point is equal to the highest turned down offer of the opponent in the past. This makes the payoffs and therefore potential equilibrium strategies depen...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Hauptverfasser: Driesen, Bram (VerfasserIn) , Perea, Andrés (VerfasserIn) , Peters, Hans J. M. (VerfasserIn)
Dokumenttyp: Article (Journal)
Sprache:Englisch
Veröffentlicht: September 2012
In: Mathematical social sciences
Year: 2012, Jahrgang: 64, Heft: 2, Pages: 103-118
DOI:10.1016/j.mathsocsci.2011.10.010
Online-Zugang:Verlag, Volltext: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mathsocsci.2011.10.010
Verlag, Volltext: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0165489611001193
Volltext
Verfasserangaben:Bram Driesen, Andrés Perea, Hans Peters
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The Rubinstein alternating offers bargaining game is reconsidered under the assumption that each player is loss averse and the associated reference point is equal to the highest turned down offer of the opponent in the past. This makes the payoffs and therefore potential equilibrium strategies dependent on the history of play. A subgame perfect equilibrium is constructed, in which the strategies depend on the history of play through the current reference points. It is shown that this equilibrium is unique under some assumptions that it shares with the equilibrium in the classical model: immediate acceptance of equilibrium offers, indifference between acceptance and rejection of such offers, and strategies depending only on the current reference points. It is also shown that in this equilibrium loss aversion is a disadvantage. Moreover, a relation with asymmetric Nash bargaining is established, where a player’s bargaining power is negatively related to own loss aversion and positively to the opponent’s loss aversion.
Beschreibung:Gesehen am 29.11.2018
Available online15 November 2011
Beschreibung:Online Resource
DOI:10.1016/j.mathsocsci.2011.10.010