Suppose Justine and Sarah are playing the ultimatum game. Justine is the proposer, has $140 to allocate, and Sarah can accept or reject the offer. Based on repeated experiments of the ultimatum game, what combination of payouts to Justine and Sarah is most likely to occur?.

Suppose Justine and Sarah are playing the ultimatum game. Justine is the proposer, has $140 to allocate, and Sarah can accept or reject the offer. Based on repeated experiments of the ultimatum game, what combination of payouts to Justine and Sarah is most likely to occur?.

Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving Approach

5th Edition

ISBN:9781337106665

Author:Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike Shor

Publisher:Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike Shor

Chapter18: Auctions

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 10MC

See similar textbooks

Suppose Justine and Sarah are playing the ultimatum game. Justine is the proposer, has $140 to allocate, and Sarah can accept or reject the offer. Based on repeated experiments of the ultimatum game, what combination of payouts to Justine and Sarah is most likely to occur?.

Expert Solution

This question has been solved!

Explore an expertly crafted, step-by-step solution for a thorough understanding of key concepts.

This is a popular solution!

SEE SOLUTION Check out a sample Q&A here

Introduction

VIEW

Explanation

VIEW

Answer:

VIEW

Trending now

This is a popular solution!

Step by step

Solved in 3 steps

SEE SOLUTION Check out a sample Q&A here

Knowledge Booster

Learn more about

Need a deep-dive on the concept behind this application? Look no further. Learn more about this topic, economics and related others by exploring similar questions and additional content below.

Similar questions

Consider the following scenarios in the Ultimatum game, viewed from the perspective of the Recipient. Assume that the Recipient is motivated by negative reciprocity and will gain $15 of value from rejecting an offer that is strictly less than 50 percent of the total amount to be divided between the two players by the Proposer. Assume that the Proposer can only make offers in increments of $1. If the pot is $30, what is the minimum offer that the Responder will accept? What percent of the pie is this amount? The minimum offer that will be accepted is S. which represents percent of the pie. If the pot is $100, what is the minimum offer that the Responder will accept? What percent of the pie is this amount? The minimum offer that will be accepted is S, which represents percent of the pie. (Round answers to 2 decimal places as needed)
please only do: if you can teach explain each part
please if you can teach explain
Can i get help?
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.
Consider an odd type of student who prefers to study alone except when the group is large. We have four of these folks: Melissa, Josh, Samina, and Wei. Melissa and Josh are deciding between studying in the common room in their dorm (which we will denote D) and the library (denoted L). Samina and Wei are choosing between the library and the local cafe (denoted C). If someone is the only person at a location, then his or her payoff is 6. If he or she is one of two people at a location, then the payoff is 2. If he or she is one of three people, then the payoff is 1. If all four end up together, then the payoff is 8.a. Is it a Nash equilibrium for Melissa and Josh to study in the commonroom and for Samina and Wei to study in the cafe?b. Is it a Nash equilibrium for Josh to study in the common room, Saminato study in the cafe, and Melissa and Wei to study in the library?c. Find the Nash equilibria.
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 a modified version of the ultimatum game, with altruism. There is a pie of size 50 to be split between Proposer (P) and Responder (R). In the first stage, P offers a share 0 ≤ x ≤ 1 of the pie to R. In the second stage, R accepts or rejects P's offer. If R accepts, the pie is split according to the proposed division, with P receiving (1 - x) x 50 and R receiving x x 50. If R rejects, both players receive none of the pie. But players' payoffs are not equal to how much of the pie they receive. In particular, payoffs in the event of an accepted offer are: Up (1x) x 50+ bx × 50 UR = x x 50+b(1-x) × 50 (Payoffs in the event of a rejected offer are 0 for both players.) Here, the parameter b > 0 measures how altruistic players are, i.e. how much "happier" a player is when his opponent receives more pie. a) Suppose b = 0.5. How much pie does P receive in the subgame perfect Nash equilibrium of the game? (specify the total amount of pie, not the share). b) Suppose b=0.5. What is P's…
We learned that we can use choice between a gamble over someone's best and worst outcomes and getting an outcome of interest (like getting pizza) for certain as a way to assign numeric values to utility (on a scale of 0 to 1). Using this method, if you are indifferent between the following: A gamble that has a 0.3 chance of your best possible outcome (and no lower chance), and a 0.7 chance of your worst possible outcome. Getting pizza for certain. it means that your utility for getting pizza is:
Imagine two drivers playing chicken, a game where they drive towards one another with their cars. Each driver has two actions: go straight or turn left. For simplicity, we standardize directions according to the perspective of an overhead observer. Thus, if both drivers select the same action, they will crash. At the same time, each driver wants to go straight, to seem tough and fearless. Utilities are given by the following table: Utility Turn Left Straight Turn Left -20, -20 - 5, 10 Straight 10, -5 -10, -10 These are in the format (row player, column player) 1. Does either player have a dominating strategy? If so, identify all of them. 2. What are the pure strategy Nash equilibria of this game? 3. Does the game have any mixed strategy Nash equilibria? If yes, compute all of them.
Amir and Beatrice play the following game. Amir offers an amount of money z € [0, 1] to Beatrice. Beatrice can either accept or reject. If Beatrice accepts, then Amir receives 1 - z dollars and Beatrice receives a dollars. If Beatrice rejects, then both receive no money. As in the Ultimatum Game, Amir cares only about maximizing the amount of money he receives. Beatrice, on the other hand, detests Amir, and therefore cares about the amount of money that both receive: if Amir receives y dollars and Beatrice receives a dollars, then Beatrice's payoff is a-ay where a > 0. (a) Find all pure strategy Nash equilibria of the game in which the two players choose simultaneously (thus Beatrice accepts or rejects without seeing Amir's offer). Solution: The NE are the strategy profiles in which Beatrice rejects and Amir's offer a satisfies 2-a(1-x) ≤0, i.e. r ≤a/(1+a). (b) Find all subgame perfect equilibria of the sequential game in which Amir first makes the offer and Beatrice observes the offer…
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.”