Browse > Article

The Effects of Decision-Making Situation In Ultimatum Game  

Park, Sang-June (전북대학교 경영학부)
Cheon, Do-Jeong (전북대학교 경영학부)
Publication Information
Korean Management Science Review / v.25, no.2, 2008 , pp. 1-12 More about this Journal
Abstract
In the ultimatum game two players have to divide a certain amount of money between them. One player is the allocator and proposes a division of the money. The other is the recipient and can either accept or reject the proposed division. If the recipient accepts, the money is divided as proposed. If the recipient rejects, however, both players receive nothing. Purchase decisions could be classified on two basic factors (or dimensions) : involvement and think/feel in the FCB grid model. In this study we studied the influences of the two factors in purchase decisions on the choice of strategy (or propensity to fairness) in the ultimatum game. The empirical study showed that a decision maker chooses rational strategy more frequently when he (or she) is thinkful (or cognitive) in high involvement level.
Keywords
Fairness; Ultimatum Game; Nash Equilibrium; FCB Grid Model;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 장대련, 한민희, 광고론, 학현사, 2006
2 Bolton, G.E. and R. Zwick, "Anonymity Versus Punishment in Ultimatum Bargaining," Games and Economic Behavior, Vol.10(1995), pp.95- 121   DOI   ScienceOn
3 Güth, W., R. Schmittberger, and B. Schwarze, "An Experimental Analysis of Ultimatum Games," Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, Vol.3(1982), pp.367-388   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Güth, W. and R. Tietz, "Ultimatum Bargaining Behavior：A Survey and Comparison of Experimental Results," The Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol.11(1990), pp.417-449
5 Hofmann, E., K. McCabe, and V.L. Smith, "On expectations and Monetary Stakes in Ultimatum Games," International Journal of Game Theory, Vol.25(1996a), pp.289-302   DOI
6 Ratchford, Brain T., "New Insights about the FCB GRID," Journal of Advertising Research, Vol.27, No.4(1987), pp.24-38
7 Sanfey, A.G. et al., "The Neural Basis of Economic Decision-Marketing in the Ultimatum Game," Science, Vol.300(2003), pp.1755-1758   DOI   ScienceOn
8 Suleiman, R., "Expectations and Fairness in a Modified Ultimatum Game," Journal of Economic Psychology, Vol.17(1996), pp.531-554   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Thaler, R.H., "Anomalies：The ultimatum game," The Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol.2(1988), pp.195-206   DOI   ScienceOn
10 Van Dijk, E. and R. Vermunt, "Strategy and Fairness in Social Decision Making：Sometimes it pays to be powerless," Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, Vol.36(2000), pp.1-25   DOI   ScienceOn
11 이명천, "광고전략모델의 이론적 타당성과 적용 가능성에 관한 연구 - FCB그리드모델을 중심 으로-", 광고학연구, (1990), pp.137-156
12 Camerer, C.F. and R.H. Thaler, "Ultimatums, Dictators and Manners," The Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol.9(1995), pp.209-219
13 Knez, M.J. and C.F. Camerer, "Outside Options and Social Comparison in Three-Player Ultimatum Game Experiments," Games and Economic Behavior, Vol.10(1995), pp.65-94   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Vaughan, R., "How Advertising Works：A planning model," Journal of Advertising Research, Vol.20, No.5(1980), pp.27-33
15 Kramer, R.M., C.G., McClintock, and D.M. Messick, "Social Values and Cooperative Response to a Simulated Resource Conservation Crisis," Journal of Personality, Vol.54 (1986), pp.576-592   DOI
16 Thaler, R.H., The Winner's Curse：Paradoxes and Anomalies of Economic Life, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ., 1992
17 Kagel, J.H., C. Kim, and D. Moser, "Fairness in Ultimatum Games with Asymmetric Information and Asymmetric Payoffs," Games and Economic Behavior, Vol.13(1996), pp.100-110   DOI
18 De Dreu, C.K.W., J.C. Lualhati, and C.M. McCusker, "Effects of Gain-Loss Frames on Satisfaction with Self-Other Outcome Differences," European Journal of Social Psychology, Vol.24(1994), pp.497-510   DOI   ScienceOn
19 Van Lange, P.A.M., "The Pursuit of Joint Outcomes and Equality in Outcomes：An Integrative Model of Social Value Orientations," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol.77(1999), pp.337-349   DOI
20 Messick, D.M. and K.P. Sentis, "Estimating Social and Nonsocial Utility Functions from Ordinal Data," European Journal of Social Psychology, Vol.15(1985), pp.389-399   DOI
21 Van Lange, P.A.M. and D.M. Kuhlman, "Social Value Orientations and Impressions of Partner's Honesty and Intelligence：A test of the morality effect," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol.67(1994), pp.126-141   DOI   ScienceOn
22 Blount, S., "When Social Outcomes Aren't Fai r：The effect of causal attributions on preferences," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol.63(1995), pp.131-144   DOI   ScienceOn
23 Handgraaf, M.J.J., E. Van Dijk, H.A.M. Wilke, and R. Vermunt, "Evaluability in Ultimatum Games," Manuscript submitted for publication, 2002
24 Güth, W. and R. Tietz, Auctioning ultimatum bargaining position, In Scholz, R.W. (ed.), Current Issues in West German Decision Research, Lang, Frankfurt, Germany, (1986), pp. 60-73
25 Handgraaf, M.J., J.E., Van Dijk, and D. De Cremer, "Social Utility in Ultimatum Bargaining," Social Justice Research, Vol.16, No.3 (2003), pp.263-283   DOI   ScienceOn
26 설선혜, 최인철, "최후 통첩 게임에서의 자기 선 택과 타인 조언", 한국 심리학회 2007 연차학술대회논문집, (2007), pp.422-423
27 Crosen, R. and N. Buchan, "Gender and Culture： International Experiment Evidence From Trust Games," The American Economic Review, Vol.89, No.2(1999), pp.386-391   DOI   ScienceOn
28 Loewenstein, G.F., L. Thompson, and M.H. Bazerman, "Social Utility and Decision Making in Interpersonal Contexts," Journal of Personality and Socical Psychology, Vol.57(1989), pp.426-441   DOI