PuSH - Publikationsserver des Helmholtz Zentrums München

Gaertner, W.* ; Bradley, R.* ; Xu, Y.* ; Schwettmann, L.

Against the proportionality principle: Experimental findings on bargaining over losses.

PLoS ONE 14:e0218805 (2019)
Verlagsversion Forschungsdaten DOI PMC
Open Access Gold
Creative Commons Lizenzvertrag
© 2019 Gaertner et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. But experimental studies of related situations, such as those involving bankruptcies or bequests in which the sum of the legal claims that can be made against a bank or firm or estate are greater than their values, have produced strong support for the proportionality principle. To test whether this principle would find support in other situations involving losses we designed an experimental game in which four players start out with differing initial endowments of real money. They are then informed that a certain amount of this resource has to be given back to the experimenter. How should the loss be shared among the agents? This game was run at different locations and under different treatments over a period of almost three years. We found that the proportionality principle was rarely proposed and even less frequently accepted as a solution to this problem. One of the main reasons for this result was that the two players with the smallest endowments opposed most of the proposals which asked them to contribute at least some positive amount of their own initial resource.
Altmetric
Weitere Metriken?
[➜Einloggen]
Zusatzinfos bearbeiten [➜Einloggen]
Publikationstyp Artikel: Journalartikel
Dokumenttyp Wissenschaftlicher Artikel
Korrespondenzautor
ISSN (print) / ISBN 1932-6203
Zeitschrift PLoS ONE
Quellenangaben Band: 14, Heft: 7, Seiten: , Artikelnummer: e0218805 Supplement: ,
Verlag Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Verlagsort Lawrence, Kan.
Nichtpatentliteratur Publikationen
Begutachtungsstatus Peer reviewed
Institut(e) Institute of Health Economics and Health Care Management (IGM)