Behavior of a Purely Self-Interested Responder in the Ultimatum Game
According to the model of pure self-interest, a Responder in the ultimatum game would accept any positive offer, regardless of how small. This is because receiving any amount of money is a better financial outcome than receiving nothing, which is the result of rejecting an offer.
0
1
Tags
Library Science
Economics
Economy
Introduction to Microeconomics Course
Social Science
Empirical Science
Science
CORE Econ
Ch.4 Strategic interactions and social dilemmas - The Economy 2.0 Microeconomics @ CORE Econ
The Economy 2.0 Microeconomics @ CORE Econ
Related
Predicted Outcome of the Ultimatum Game with Self-Interested Players
The Proposer's Strategic Decision
In a game, a 'Proposer' is given $100 and must offer a portion of it to a 'Responder'. The Responder can either accept the offer, and the money is split as proposed, or reject it, and both players receive nothing. If you are the Responder, which of the following best represents the fundamental trade-off you must evaluate when deciding on your minimum acceptable offer?
Proposer's Dilemma: Risk vs. Reward
Proposer's Dilemma: Risk vs. Reward
The Proposer's Strategic Dilemma
In a game where one person (the 'Proposer') is given $100 and must offer a portion of it to a second person (the 'Responder'), what is the central strategic conflict the Proposer must resolve? The Responder can accept the offer, in which case the money is split as proposed, or reject it, in which case both individuals receive nothing.
In a one-time interaction, a 'Proposer' is given $100 and must offer a portion to a 'Responder'. The Responder can either accept the offer, splitting the money as proposed, or reject it, in which case both players receive nothing. The Proposer offers $20. If the Responder rejects this offer, which statement best analyzes the strategic failure in this interaction?
In a one-time interaction, a 'Proposer' is given $100 and must offer a portion to a 'Responder'. If the Responder accepts, the money is split as proposed; if they reject, both get nothing. The Proposer believes the Responder is highly likely to reject any offer below $30. Given this belief, which of the following statements provides the most accurate evaluation of the Proposer's strategic options?
True or False: In a one-time interaction where a 'Proposer' is given $100 to split with a 'Responder', the Proposer's primary strategic task is to determine the maximum amount they can keep, without considering the possibility that the Responder might reject the offer.
Factors Influencing Ultimatum Game Outcomes
Behavior of a Purely Self-Interested Responder in the Ultimatum Game
In a one-time interaction, one person (the 'Proposer') is given a sum of money and must offer a portion of it to a second person (the 'Responder'). The Responder can either accept the offer, and the money is split as proposed, or reject it, and both players receive nothing. Match each player with their primary strategic challenge.
Learn After
Influence of Social Preferences on Responder Behavior in the Ultimatum Game
Two individuals, a Proposer and a Responder, are part of a one-time economic interaction to divide a sum of $10. The Proposer offers a split, and the Responder can either accept it (they both get the proposed amounts) or reject it (they both get $0). If the Responder is assumed to be purely self-interested, meaning their only goal is to maximize their own financial gain, what will they do if the Proposer offers them $0.01?
Responder Behavior Under Competition vs. Self-Interest
Responder's Logic in a One-Shot Division Game
Analyzing Responder Behavior
In a one-shot interaction to divide a sum of money, a purely self-interested Responder should reject an offer they perceive as 'unfair' (for example, receiving only 1% of the total sum) to signal that such offers are unacceptable.
In a one-time interaction, a Proposer offers a Responder a share of $100. If the Responder accepts, they both get the proposed amounts. If the Responder rejects, they both get $0. Four different Responders are each offered $5. Which of the following Responders is acting in a way that is perfectly consistent with a model of pure self-interest (i.e., their only goal is to maximize their own monetary gain)?
In a one-time interaction, two individuals must agree on how to split $20. One person (the Proposer) makes an offer, and the other (the Responder) can either accept or reject it. If the offer is accepted, the money is split as proposed. If it is rejected, both individuals receive $0. The Proposer offers the Responder $0. Assuming the Responder's sole motivation is to maximize their own financial payoff, what is their optimal action?
In a one-time economic interaction, a 'Proposer' is given $10 and must offer a portion of it to a 'Responder'. The Responder can either accept the offer, in which case the money is split as proposed, or reject it, in which case both individuals receive $0. If the Responder's sole motivation is to maximize their own financial payoff, what is the smallest positive amount of money they should logically accept?
Critique of a Responder's Rationale
Evaluating a Responder's Decision
In a one-time interaction, a 'Proposer' offers a 'Responder' a portion of a sum of money. If the Responder accepts, the money is split as proposed; if they reject, both receive nothing. According to a model where the Responder's only goal is to maximize their own financial outcome, they should be willing to accept any offer that is strictly greater than ____.