The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A study of cartel stability: the Joint Executive Committee, 1880–1886
Abstract
This article employs weekly time series data on the Joint Executive Committee railroad cartel from 1880 to 1886 to test empirically the proposition that observed prices reflected switches from collusive to noncooperative behavior. An equilibrium model of dynamic oligopoly with asymmetric firms, together with explicit functional form assumptions about costs and demand, determines the estimating equations and stochastic structure of the econometric model. The hypothesis that no switch took place, so that price and quantity movements were solely attributable to exogenous shifts in the demand and cost functions, is then tested against this alternative and rejected. Introduction Industrial organization economists have recognized for some time that the problem of distinguishing empirically between collusive and noncooperative behavior, in the absence of a “smoking gun,” is a difficult one. This article exploits the model proposed in Green and Porter (1984). They consider an explicitly dynamic model in which the firms of an industry are faced with the problem of detecting and deterring cheating on an agreement. In particular, they assume that firms set their own production level and observe the market price, but do not know the quantity produced by any other firm. Firms' output is assumed to be of homogeneous quality, so they face a common market price. If the market demand curve has a stochastic component, an unexpectedly low price may signal either deviations from collusive output levels or a “downward” demand shock.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Noncooperative Collusion under Imperfect Price Information
Green, E. J., & Porter, R. H. (1984) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1911462 · Cited by 1,998
Self-citationStigler, G. J. (1964) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/258853 · Cited by 1,760
Oligopoly and the Theory of Games.
Binmore, K. G., & Friedman, J. W. (1978) · Economica · doi:10.2307/2553264 · Cited by 740
Lee, L.-F., & Porter, R. H. (1984) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1911495 · Cited by 170
Self-citation
Cited by
Chapter 17 Empirical studies of industries with market power
Bresnahan, T. F. (1989) · Handbook of Industrial Organization · doi:10.1016/s1573-448x(89)02005-4 · Cited by 1,271
Measuring Duopoly Power in the British Electricity Spot Market
Wolfram, C. D. (1999) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.89.4.805 · Cited by 743
Increased debt and industry product markets an empirical analysis
Phillips, G. M. (1995) · Journal of Financial Economics · doi:10.1016/0304-405x(94)00785-y · Cited by 447
Market Conduct in the Airline Industry: An Empirical Investigation
Brander, J. A., & Zhang, A. (1990) · The RAND Journal of Economics · doi:10.2307/2555469 · Cited by 409
Testing Static Oligopoly Models: Conduct and Cost in the Sugar Industry, 1890-1914
Genesove, D., & Mullin, W. P. (1998) · The RAND Journal of Economics · doi:10.2307/2555893 · Cited by 393
Metadata
- Authors
- Porter, R. H.
- Venue
- Cournot Oligopoly
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press
- Published
- 1989-01-27
- Pages
- 402-420
- OpenAlex
- W1529211038
- Cited by
- 424
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 40.42
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A study of cartel stability: the Joint Executive Committee, 1880–1886. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/cbo9780511528231.024
- The paper
- Porter, R. H. (1989). A study of cartel stability: the Joint Executive Committee, 1880–1886. Cournot Oligopoly. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511528231.024
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.