Arbeitspapier

Ranking alternatives by a fair bidding rule: A theoretical and experimental analysis

We introduce a procedurally fair rule to study a situation where people disagree about the value of three alternatives in the way captured by the voting paradox. The rule allows people to select a final collective ranking by submitting a bid vector with six components (the six possible rankings of the three alternatives). In a laboratory experiment we test the robustness of the rule to the introduction of subsidies and taxes. We have two main results. First, in all treatments, the most frequently chosen ranking is the socially efficient one. Second, subsidies slightly enhance overbidding. Furthermore, an analysis of individual bid vectors reveals interesting behavioral regularities.

Sprache
Englisch

Erschienen in
Series: Jena Economic Research Papers ; No. 2012,005

Klassifikation
Wirtschaft
Design of Experiments: Laboratory, Group Behavior
Institutions: Design, Formation, Operations, and Impact
Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations
Thema
bidding behavior
procedural fairness
voting paradox
Gruppenentscheidung
Ranking-Verfahren
Gerechtigkeit
Abstimmungsparadoxon
Test
Subvention
Steuer

Ereignis
Geistige Schöpfung
(wer)
Güth, Werner
Levati, M. Vittoria
Montinari, Natalia
Ereignis
Veröffentlichung
(wer)
Friedrich Schiller University Jena and Max Planck Institute of Economics
(wo)
Jena
(wann)
2012

Handle
Letzte Aktualisierung
10.03.2025, 11:44 MEZ

Datenpartner

Dieses Objekt wird bereitgestellt von:
ZBW - Deutsche Zentralbibliothek für Wirtschaftswissenschaften - Leibniz-Informationszentrum Wirtschaft. Bei Fragen zum Objekt wenden Sie sich bitte an den Datenpartner.

Objekttyp

  • Arbeitspapier

Beteiligte

  • Güth, Werner
  • Levati, M. Vittoria
  • Montinari, Natalia
  • Friedrich Schiller University Jena and Max Planck Institute of Economics

Entstanden

  • 2012

Ähnliche Objekte (12)