The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Preferences, property rights, and anonymity in bargaining games.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“It seems that proposers in the contest condition felt self-servingly entitled to a higher payoff, but responders did not view the contest as relevant to the fair division of the pie.”
From Explaining Bargaining Impasse: The Role of Self-Serving Biases (1997) · cites this paper as Hoffman, McCabe, Shachat and Smith, 1994
In the citing paper
“Offers in the contest condition were lower than in the chance condition, and the rejection rate was substantially higher.”
From Explaining Bargaining Impasse: The Role of Self-Serving Biases (1997) · cites this paper as Hoffman, McCabe, Shachat and Smith, 1994
In the citing paper
“Experiments using the ultimatum game have shown that seemingly subtle variations in procedure that should not matter from a strictly economic point of view-for example, the mechanism that determines the roles, whether the game is framed as an offer game or a demand game, and the timing and method of eliciting an offerall have powerful effects on how people play the game (Blount, 1995;Hoffman, McC”
From Explaining Bargaining Impasse: The Role of Self-Serving Biases (1997) · cites this paper as Hoffman, McCabe, Shachat and Smith, 1994
In the citing paper
“To assess the convergent validity of the ZPG, participants played the dictator game [31].”
From Short-term compassion training increases prosocial behavior in a newly developed prosocial game (2011) · cites this paper as [31]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 401–500 of 997
LESOROGOL, C. K. (2007) · Current Anthropology · doi:10.1086/523017 · Cited by 50
Rules for Experimenting in Psychology and Economics, and Why They Differ
Camerer, C. F. (1997) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-60495-9_25 · Cited by 46
Ultimatum Bargaining Experiments: The State of the ArtPreprint
Bearden, J. N. (2005) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.626183 · Cited by 50
Are fairness constraints on profit-seeking important?
Piron, R., & Fernandez, L. (1995) · Journal of Economic Psychology · doi:10.1016/0167-4870(94)00037-b · Cited by 49
Expectations and outcome: The role of Proposer features in the Ultimatum Game
Marchetti, A., Castelli, I., Harlé, K. M., & Sanfey, A. G. (2011) · Journal of Economic Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.joep.2011.03.009 · Cited by 48
“Behavioral experiments” in economics
Weber, R. A., & Camerer, C. F. (2006) · Experimental Economics · doi:10.1007/s10683-006-9121-5 · Cited by 49
Sorting out the Seeking: The Economics of Individual Motivations
Schram, A. J. H. C. (2000) · Public Choice · doi:10.1023/a:1005036003561 · Cited by 49
Measuring the Distribution of SpitefulnessPreprint
Kimbrough, E. O., & Reiß, J. P. (n.d.) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics · Cited by 47
Neuroeconomics and International Studies: A New Understanding of Trust
Zak, P. J., & Kugler, J. (2011) · International Studies Perspectives · doi:10.1111/j.1528-3585.2011.00424.x · Cited by 48
Gong, B., Yan, H., & Yang, C.-L. (2010) · Experimental Economics · doi:10.1007/s10683-014-9403-2 · Cited by 48
Living standards, poverty and inequality in the UK: 2012
Cribb, J., Joyce, R. C., & Phillips, D. (2017) · doi:10.1920/co.ifs.2012.0124 · Cited by 48
Concessions, Violence, and Indirect Rule: Evidence from the Congo Free State
Lowes, S., & Montero, E. (2020) · National Bureau of Economic Research · doi:10.3386/w27893 · Cited by 51
Elite capture, political voice and exclusion form aid: an experimental study
D’Exelle, B., & Riedl, A. M. (2008) · Research Publications (Maastricht University) · doi:10.26481/umamet.2008024 · Cited by 48
Preferences over Income Distributions
Engelmann, D., & Strobel, M. (2007) · Public Finance Review · doi:10.1177/1091142106294713 · Cited by 47
A Novel Computerized Real Effort Task Based on SlidersPreprint
Gill, D. M., & Prowse, V. L. (2011) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.1732324 · Cited by 55
Dilemmas and Bargains: Autism, Theory-of-Mind, Cooperation and FairnessPreprint
Hill, E. L., & Sally, D. F. (2003) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.407040 · Cited by 47
Bargaining over waiting time in ultimatum game experiments
Berger, R. D., Rauhut, H., Prade, S., & Helbing, D. (2011) · Social Science Research · doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2011.09.009 · Cited by 47
From Honesty–Humility to fair behavior – Benevolence or a (blind) fairness norm?
Hilbig, B. E., Thielmann, I., Wührl, J. M., & Zettler, I. (2015) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2015.02.017 · Cited by 44
Comparative Experimental Evidence from Machiguenga, Mapuche, Huinca, and American Populations
Henrich, J., & Smith, N. K. (2004) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/0199262055.003.0005 · Cited by 46
Other-regarding preferences: Egalitarian warm glow, empathy, and group size
Stahl, D. O., & Haruvy, E. E. (2005) · Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization · doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2004.10.008 · Cited by 52
Information, uncertainty, and subjective entitlements in bargaining
Karagözoğlu, E., & Riedl, A. M. (2010) · Research Publications (Maastricht University) · doi:10.26481/umamet.2010043 · Cited by 46
Internet cautions: Experimental games with internet partners
Eckel, C. C., & Wilson, R. K. (2006) · Experimental Economics · doi:10.1007/s10683-006-4307-4 · Cited by 45
Kish: Where Customers Pay As They Wish
Kim, J., Natter, M., & Spann, M. (2010) · Review of Marketing Science · doi:10.2202/1546-5616.1118 · Cited by 45
Separating real incentives and accountability
Vieider, F. M. (2011) · Experimental Economics · doi:10.1007/s10683-011-9279-3 · Cited by 50
Paciotti, B. M., Richerson, P. J., Baum, B., Lubell, M. N., Waring, T. M., McElreath, R. L., Efferson, C. M., & Edsten, E. (2011) · Research in economic anthropology · doi:10.1108/s0190-1281(2011)0000031014 · Cited by 49
Trigger happy or gun shy? Dissolving common-value partnerships with Texas shootouts
Brooks, R. R. W., Landeo, C. M., & Spier, K. E. (2010) · The RAND Journal of Economics · doi:10.1111/j.1756-2171.2010.00115.x · Cited by 45
No good deed goes unpunished: the social costs of prosocial behaviour
Raihani, N., & Power, E. A. (2021) · Evolutionary Human Sciences · doi:10.1017/ehs.2021.35 · Cited by 47
Fairness and retaliation in a rural Nigerian village
Gowdy, J. M., Iorgulescu, R. I., & Onyeiwu, S. (2003) · Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization · doi:10.1016/s0167-2681(03)00026-x · Cited by 45
Is fairness used instrumentally? Evidence from sequential bargaining
Carpenter, J. P. (2003) · Journal of Economic Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0167-4870(02)00194-0 · Cited by 45
Social Position and Distributive Justice: Experimental Evidence
Swope, K. J., Cadigan, J., Schmitt, P. M., et al. (2008) · Southern Economic Journal · doi:10.1002/j.2325-8012.2008.tb00865.x · Cited by 44
Thielmann, I., Zimmermann, J., Leising, D., & Hilbig, B. E. (2017) · European Journal of Personality · doi:10.1002/per.2112 · Cited by 42
Proportion offered in the Dictator and Ultimatum Games decreases with amount and social distance
Bechler, C. J., Green, L., & Myerson, J. (2015) · Behavioural Processes · doi:10.1016/j.beproc.2015.04.003 · Cited by 51
Desiraju, R., & Sappington, D. E. M. (2007) · Journal of Economics & Management Strategy · doi:10.1111/j.1530-9134.2007.00140.x · Cited by 44
An evolutionary perspective on morality
Brosnan, S. F. (2010) · Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization · doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2010.04.008 · Cited by 43
Social Preferences: Fundamental Characteristics and Economic Consequences
Fehr, E., & Charness, G. (2025) · Journal of Economic Literature · doi:10.1257/jel.20241391 · Cited by 60
A Cross-Cultural Study of Noblesse Oblige in Economic Decision-Making
Fiddick, L., Cummins, D. D., Janicki, M., Lee, S., & Erlich, N. (2013) · Human Nature · doi:10.1007/s12110-013-9169-9 · Cited by 47
No gain without pain: The psychological costs of dishonesty
Thielmann, I., & Hilbig, B. E. (2018) · Journal of Economic Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.joep.2018.06.001 · Cited by 40
The Dynamics of Belief Updating in Human Cooperation: Findings from inter-brain ERP hyperscanning
Zhang, D., Lin, Y., Jing, Y., Feng, C., & Gu, R. (2019) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.05.029 · Cited by 45
Contracting under Incomplete Information and Social Preferences: An Experimental Study
Hoppe, E. I., & Schmitz, P. W. (2013) · The Review of Economic Studies · doi:10.1093/restud/rdt010 · Cited by 47
Gender and generosity: does degree of anonymity or group gender composition matter?
Cadsby, C. B., Servátka, M., & Song, F. (2010) · Experimental Economics · doi:10.1007/s10683-010-9242-8 · Cited by 43
Fairness in Extended Dictator Game Experiments
Oberholzer‐Gee, F., & Eichenberger, R. (2008) · The B E Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy · doi:10.2202/1935-1682.1718 · Cited by 42
Are perceptions of fairness relationship-specific? The case of noblesse oblige
Fiddick, L., & Cummins, D. (2007) · Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1080/17470210600577266 · Cited by 40
Moshagen, M., Hilbig, B. E., & Musch, J. (2011) · European Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/ejsp.793 · Cited by 43
Harrison, G. W. (2005) · Research in experimental economics · doi:10.1016/s0193-2306(04)10002-1 · Cited by 41
Holm, H. J., & Engseld, P. (2005) · Experimental Economics · doi:10.1007/s10683-005-1463-x · Cited by 43
Anbarcı, N., & Feltovich, N. (2017) · Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization · doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2017.11.020 · Cited by 40
Markets and the crowding out of conservation‐relevant behavior
Cinner, J. E., Barnes, M. L., Gurney, G. G., Lockie, S., & Rojas, C. A. (2020) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1111/cobi.13606 · Cited by 43
Disappointment Aversion in internet Bidding-Decisions
Sonsino, D. (2007) · Theory and Decision · doi:10.1007/s11238-007-9055-1 · Cited by 37
Resource regimes and cooperation
Vatn, A. (2006) · Land Use Policy · doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2006.06.002 · Cited by 42
On the possible conflict between economic growth and social development
Antoci, A., Sacco, P. L., & Vanin, P. (2005) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511522154.008 · Cited by 41
Do People Care About Social Context? Framing Effects in Dictator GamesPreprint
Dreber, A., Ellingsen, T., Johannesson, M., & Rand, D. G. (2012) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.1927343 · Cited by 41
Competition, testosterone, and adult neurobehavioral plasticity
Vermeer, A. B. L., Riečanský, I., & Eisenegger, C. (2016) · Progress in brain research · doi:10.1016/bs.pbr.2016.05.004 · Cited by 42
The role of prosocial behaviors in mate choice: A critical review of the literature
Bhogal, M. S., Farrelly, D., & Galbraith, N. D. (2019) · Current Psychology · doi:10.1007/s12144-019-00308-8 · Cited by 45
Effective and necessary: Individual supplier behavior in revenue sharing and wholesale contracts
Niederhoff, J. A., & Kouvelis, P. (2019) · European Journal of Operational Research · doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2019.03.038 · Cited by 41
Umer, H., Kurosaki, T., & Iwasaki, I. (2022) · Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics · doi:10.1016/j.socec.2022.101827 · Cited by 48
A neural signature of fairness in altruism: A game of theta?
Rodrigues, J., Ulrich, N., & Hewig, J. S. (2014) · Social Neuroscience · doi:10.1080/17470919.2014.977401 · Cited by 41
The Market Instinct: The Demise of Social Preferences for Self-Interest
Reeson, A. F., & Tisdell, J. G. (2010) · Environmental and Resource Economics · doi:10.1007/s10640-010-9387-0 · Cited by 42
Belot, M. V. K., Duch, R. M., & Miller, L. (2010) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics · Cited by 40
Communication in ultimatum games
Rankin, F. W. (2003) · Economics Letters · doi:10.1016/s0165-1765(03)00191-5 · Cited by 40
Biel, A., Johansson‐Stenman, O., & Nilsson, A. (2011) · Journal of Economic Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.joep.2011.07.010 · Cited by 43
Feelings of ownership in dictator games
Korenok, O., Millner, E. L., & Razzolini, L. (2017) · Journal of Economic Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.joep.2017.04.003 · Cited by 40
INEQUALITY AND PROCEDURAL FAIRNESS IN A MONEY-BURNING AND STEALING EXPERIMENT
Zizzo, D. J. (2004) · Research on economic inequality · doi:10.1016/s1049-2585(04)11010-7 · Cited by 40
On the strategic use of focal points in bargaining situations
Janssen, M. C. W. (2006) · Journal of Economic Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.joep.2006.04.006 · Cited by 40
Fairness in an Embedded Ultimatum Game
Pecorino, P., & Boening, M. V. (2010) · The Journal of Law and Economics · doi:10.1086/599622 · Cited by 29
Zeki, S., Goodenough, O. R., Chorvat, T. R., & McCabe, K. (2004) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2004.1545 · Cited by 39
Self-citationThe effects of a recipient's gender in a modified dictator game
Saad, G., & Gill, T. (2001) · Applied Economics Letters · doi:10.1080/13504850010005260 · Cited by 39
Chapter 8 Emotion and reason: The proximate effects and ultimate functions of emotions
Ketelaar, T., & Clore, G. L. (1997) · Advances in psychology · doi:10.1016/s0166-4115(97)80125-2 · Cited by 40
Self-Signaling Versus Social-Signaling in GivingPreprint
Grossman, Z. (2010) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics · Cited by 41
The evolution of charitable behaviour and the power of reputation
Barclay, P. (2011) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199586073.003.0010 · Cited by 40
Berg, J. M., Lilienfeld, S., & Waldman, I. (2013) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2013.04.003 · Cited by 33
Procedural fairness and the tolerance for income inequality
Ku, H., & Salmon, T. C. (2013) · European Economic Review · doi:10.1016/j.euroecorev.2013.09.001 · Cited by 35
Boyd, J. H., & Conley, J. P. (1997) · Journal of Economic Theory · doi:10.1006/jeth.1996.2230 · Cited by 38
Intrinsic Motivation, Effort and the Call to Public Service
Banuri, S., & Keefer, P. E. (2013) · World Bank, Washington, DC eBooks · doi:10.1596/1813-9450-6729 · Cited by 38
Norms, Conformity, and ControlsPreprint
Tayler, W. B., & Bloomfield, R. J. (2007) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.1010167 · Cited by 38
9 The Case for Behavioral Decision Research in Organizational Behavior
Moore, D. A., & Flynn, F. J. (2008) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.1080/19416520802211636 · Cited by 44
Subordinate perceptions of the superior and agency costs: Theory and evidence
Douthit, J. D., & Majerczyk, M. J. (2019) · Accounting Organizations and Society · doi:10.1016/j.aos.2019.07.003 · Cited by 37
You’ve earned it: estimating the impact of human capital on social preferences
Jakiela, P., Miguel, E. A., & Velde, V. L. T. (2014) · Experimental Economics · doi:10.1007/s10683-014-9409-9 · Cited by 37
Some factors affecting demand withholding in posted-offer markets
Ruffle, B. J. (2001) · Studies in economic theory · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-56448-2_3 · Cited by 37
The ratchet principle in a principal agent game with unknown costs: an experimental analysis
Chaudhuri, A. (1998) · Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization · doi:10.1016/s0167-2681(98)00095-x · Cited by 37
Trust, Cooperation, and Conflict: Neuropolitics and International Relations
Kugler, J., & Zak, P. J. (2016) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-40823-1_4 · Cited by 36
Nixon, D. V. (2014) · Geoforum · doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2014.04.002 · Cited by 36
Azevedo, R. T., Panasiti, M. S., Maglio, R., & Aglioti, S. M. (2017) · British Journal of Psychology · doi:10.1111/bjop.12245 · Cited by 34
The entitlement effect in the ultimatum game – does it even exist?
Demiral, E. E., & Möllerström, J. (2018) · Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization · doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2018.08.022 · Cited by 37
The house money effect and negative reciprocity
Danková, K., & Servátka, M. (2015) · Journal of Economic Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.joep.2015.02.007 · Cited by 36
Li, S. X., Doğan, K., & Haruvy, E. E. (2010) · International Journal of Industrial Organization · doi:10.1016/j.ijindorg.2010.04.001 · Cited by 36
Molenmaker, W. E., de Kwaadsteniet, E. W., & van Dijk, E. (2014) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2014.09.005 · Cited by 38
Conflicted advice and second opinions: Benefits, but unintended consequences
Sah, S., & Loewenstein, G. F. (2013) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2015.06.005 · Cited by 37
Why interpersonal relations matter for economics
Gui, B., & Sugden, R. (2005) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511522154.002 · Cited by 34
Tax Liability-Side Equivalence in Experimental Posted-Offer Markets
Borck, R., Engelmann, D., Müller, W., et al. (2002) · Southern Economic Journal · doi:10.2307/1061725 · Cited by 36
Civic Capital as the Missing LinkPreprint
Guiso, L., Sapienza, P., & Zingales, L. (2010) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.1574310 · Cited by 43
Why Can’t We Be Friends? - Entitlements and the Costs of Conflict
Kimbrough, E. O., & Sheremeta, R. M. (2012) · Journal of Peace Research · doi:10.1177/0022343314524428 · Cited by 38
MORALS AND MORES: EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE ON EQUITY AND EQUALITY
Konow, J., Saijo, T., & Akai, K. (2009) · Cited by 36
Theoretically robust but empirically invalid? An experimental investigation into tax equivalence
Kerschbamer, R., & Kirchsteiger, G. (2001) · Studies in economic theory · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-56448-2_12 · Cited by 35
The expanding definition of framing and its particular impact on economic experimentation
Elliott, C. S., & Hayward, D. M. (1998) · The Journal of Socio-Economics · doi:10.1016/s1053-5357(99)80086-9 · Cited by 33
A Little Fairness May Induce a Lot of Redistribution in DemocracyPreprint
Tyran, J., & Sausgruber, R. (2003) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.371984 · Cited by 35
Insiders, outsiders, and the adaptability of informal rules to ecological shocks
Kimbrough, E. O., & Wilson, B. J. (2013) · Ecological Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.02.008 · Cited by 34
Procedural fairness in lotteries assigning initial roles in a dynamic setting
Grimalda, G. F., Kar, A., & Proto, E. (2015) · Experimental Economics · doi:10.1007/s10683-015-9469-5 · Cited by 38
Seasonal altruism: How Christmas shapes unsolicited charitable giving
Ekström, M. (2018) · Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization · doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2018.07.004 · Cited by 34
Hierarchy, coercion, and exploitation: An experimental analysis
Nikiforakis, N., Oechssler, J., & Shah, A. A. (2013) · Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization · doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2013.06.008 · Cited by 34
On approval and disapproval: Theory and experiments
López‐Pérez, R., & Vorsatz, M. (2010) · Journal of Economic Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.joep.2010.03.016 · Cited by 35
Metadata
- Authors
- Hoffman, E., McCabe, K., Shachat, K., & Smith, V.
- Affiliations
- University of Arizona (US)
- Venue
- Games and Economic Behavior
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1994-11
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 346-380
- ISSN
- 0899-8256 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2010008813
- Cited by
- 1,674
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 22 · 2025: 31 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 52 · 2021: 42 · 2020: 65 · 2019: 47 · 2018: 79 · 2017: 70 · 2016: 57 · 2015: 77 · 2014: 75 · 2013: 103 · 2012: 113
- FWCI
- 76.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Games and Economic Behavior (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Game Theory and Voting Systems
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Keywords
- ultimatum game, dictator game, fairness, self-regarding preferences, first-mover advantage, property rights, anonymity, double-blind experiment, expectations, knowledge quiz
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
