Modeling the Responder's Reciprocity Motive

Universal Rejection of Zero Offers in the Ultimatum Game

Rejection of a Minimal Offer in the Ultimatum Game

In a one-shot interaction, Person A is given $100 and must propose a way to split the money with Person B. Person B can either accept the split, in which case they both receive the money as proposed, or reject it, in which case both receive $0. Person A proposes to keep $98 and give Person B $2. If Person B's decision is strongly influenced by a desire to penalize actions they perceive as violating social standards of fairness, which outcome is most likely and why?

Analyzing Experimental Outcomes in a Bargaining Game

Explaining a Seemingly Irrational Economic Decision

In a single, anonymous interaction where one person proposes how to split a sum of money and a second person can accept or reject the split (with rejection meaning both get nothing), a rejection of any offer greater than zero is considered an economically irrational decision because the second person forgoes a guaranteed gain.

Evaluating Economic Models of Behavior

In a one-time game, one person (the Proposer) is given $10 to split with a second person (the Responder). The Responder can accept the proposed split or reject it, in which case both players receive nothing. Match each potential offer from the Proposer to the Responder's most likely motivation and subsequent action, assuming the Responder is strongly influenced by social fairness norms.

In a one-time game, a Proposer is given $100 to split with a Responder. The Responder can either accept the proposed split, in which case they both receive the money as proposed, or reject it, in which case both receive nothing. Assume the Responder's decision is heavily influenced by a desire to penalize offers they perceive as unfair, with the strength of this desire increasing as the offer becomes more unfair. Arrange the following offers from most likely to be rejected to least likely to be rejected.

In a one-time bargaining game where one person proposes how to divide a sum of money and a second person can accept or reject the proposal (with rejection meaning neither person gets anything), the second person's choice to reject a low but positive offer demonstrates that their motivation is not solely to maximize their own payoff, but also to ________ the first person for a perceived breach of fairness.

Evaluating an Economic Conclusion

In a one-time, anonymous interaction, Player 1 is given $100 and must propose how to divide it with Player 2. Player 2 can either accept the proposal, in which case they both get the money as proposed, or reject it, in which case both players receive $0. Player 1 offers to keep $90 and give Player 2 $10. Player 2 rejects the offer. Which of the following statements provides the best analysis of Player 2's decision?