Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Group Decision and Negotiation 2/2021

14-07-2020

Bargaining Game with Altruistic and Spiteful Preferences

Authors: Zhongwei Feng, Chunqiao Tan, Jinchun Zhang, Qiang Zeng

Published in: Group Decision and Negotiation | Issue 2/2021

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

In real bargaining problems, players care not only about their own shares, but also about others’ shares. In addition, a player’ attitude toward others depends on how this player feels he is being treated. To model such preferences, the Rubinstein bargaining game is reconsidered, where players’ preferences is characterized as altruism and spite. First, a subgame perfect equilibrium (SPE) is constructed, where player’s strategy depends on the opponent’s share through altruistic and spiteful preferences. The uniqueness of SPE is shown if it shares with SPE in the classical Rubinstein case: no delay and stationarity. Then, a comparative statics analysis with respect to players’ altruism and spite is performed. It is shown that the equilibrium share of a player is negatively related to the opponent’s global spite and his own global altruism, and positively to global altruism of the other one and the global spite of himself. It is also found that the impact of the intrinsically altruistic and spiteful levels of a player on equilibrium share depends on this player’s attitudes towards the opponent. Furthermore, it is found that a more positive attitude towards the opponent leads to the increase (decrease) of this player’s share if this player is more (less) intrinsically altruistic than the opponent. Finally, we establish a relationship with asymmetric two-person Nash bargaining game. It is found that bargaining power of a player decreases with the globally altruistic and spiteful preferences of himself, and increases with the opponent’s. It is further found that the effects of players’ attitudes towards the opponent on their own bargaining power depend on the gap between the intrinsic altruistic and spiteful levels of players.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Literature
go back to reference Araujo A, Leon MS, Santos RC (2017) Bargained haircuts and debt policy implications. Econ Theor 64(4):635–656CrossRef Araujo A, Leon MS, Santos RC (2017) Bargained haircuts and debt policy implications. Econ Theor 64(4):635–656CrossRef
go back to reference Becker G (1977) Altruism, egoism, and genetic fitness: economics and sociobiology: reply. J Econ Lit 14(3):817–826 Becker G (1977) Altruism, egoism, and genetic fitness: economics and sociobiology: reply. J Econ Lit 14(3):817–826
go back to reference Berg J, Dickhaut J, McCabe K (1995) Trust, reciprocity, and social history. Games Econ Behav 10(1):122–142CrossRef Berg J, Dickhaut J, McCabe K (1995) Trust, reciprocity, and social history. Games Econ Behav 10(1):122–142CrossRef
go back to reference Bester H, Guth W (1998) Is altruism evolutionarily stable. J Econ Behav Organ 34(2):193–209CrossRef Bester H, Guth W (1998) Is altruism evolutionarily stable. J Econ Behav Organ 34(2):193–209CrossRef
go back to reference Chakravorty S (2019) Representation in multi-issue delegated bargaining. B E J Theor Econ 19(1):1–12 Chakravorty S (2019) Representation in multi-issue delegated bargaining. B E J Theor Econ 19(1):1–12
go back to reference Charness G, Rabin M (2002) Understanding social preferences with simple tests. Quart J Econ 117(3):817–869CrossRef Charness G, Rabin M (2002) Understanding social preferences with simple tests. Quart J Econ 117(3):817–869CrossRef
go back to reference Dawes R, Thaler R (1988) Anomalies: cooperation. J Econ Perspect 2(3):187–197CrossRef Dawes R, Thaler R (1988) Anomalies: cooperation. J Econ Perspect 2(3):187–197CrossRef
go back to reference Driesen B, Perea Andrés, Peters H (2012) Alternating offers bargaining with loss aversion. Math Soc Sci 64(2):103–118CrossRef Driesen B, Perea Andrés, Peters H (2012) Alternating offers bargaining with loss aversion. Math Soc Sci 64(2):103–118CrossRef
go back to reference Evans R (2003) A one-period version of Rubinstein’s bargaining game. Contrib Theor Econ 3(1):1–6CrossRef Evans R (2003) A one-period version of Rubinstein’s bargaining game. Contrib Theor Econ 3(1):1–6CrossRef
go back to reference Fehr E, Schmidt KM (2006) The economics of fairness, reciprocity and altruism-experimental evidence and new theories. Handb Econ Giv Altruism Reciprocity 1:615–691CrossRef Fehr E, Schmidt KM (2006) The economics of fairness, reciprocity and altruism-experimental evidence and new theories. Handb Econ Giv Altruism Reciprocity 1:615–691CrossRef
go back to reference Fehr E, Gächter S, Kirchsteiger G (1997) Reciprocity as a contract enforcement device: experimental evidence. Econometrica 65(4):833–860CrossRef Fehr E, Gächter S, Kirchsteiger G (1997) Reciprocity as a contract enforcement device: experimental evidence. Econometrica 65(4):833–860CrossRef
go back to reference Feng Z, Tan C (2019) Subgame perfect equilibrium in the Rubinstein bargaining game with loss aversion. Complexity 2019:1–23 Feng Z, Tan C (2019) Subgame perfect equilibrium in the Rubinstein bargaining game with loss aversion. Complexity 2019:1–23
go back to reference Gimpel H (2007) Loss aversion and reference-dependent preferences in multi-attribute negotiations. Group Decis Negot 16(4):303–319CrossRef Gimpel H (2007) Loss aversion and reference-dependent preferences in multi-attribute negotiations. Group Decis Negot 16(4):303–319CrossRef
go back to reference Harsanyi J, Selten R (1972) A generalized Nash solution for two-person bargaining games with incomplete information. Manag Sci 18:80–106CrossRef Harsanyi J, Selten R (1972) A generalized Nash solution for two-person bargaining games with incomplete information. Manag Sci 18:80–106CrossRef
go back to reference Hyndman K (2011) Repeated bargaining with reference-dependent preferences. Int J Game Theory 40(3):527–549CrossRef Hyndman K (2011) Repeated bargaining with reference-dependent preferences. Int J Game Theory 40(3):527–549CrossRef
go back to reference Kahneman D, Knetsch JL, Thaler R (1986) Fairness as a constraint on profit seeking: entitlements in the market. Am Econ Rev 76(4):728–741 Kahneman D, Knetsch JL, Thaler R (1986) Fairness as a constraint on profit seeking: entitlements in the market. Am Econ Rev 76(4):728–741
go back to reference Kalai E (1977) Nonsymmetric Nash solutions and replications of 2-person bargaining. Int J Game Theory 6(3):129–133CrossRef Kalai E (1977) Nonsymmetric Nash solutions and replications of 2-person bargaining. Int J Game Theory 6(3):129–133CrossRef
go back to reference Kawamori T (2019) Bilateral bargaining with endogenous status quo. Econ Lett 185:1–4CrossRef Kawamori T (2019) Bilateral bargaining with endogenous status quo. Econ Lett 185:1–4CrossRef
go back to reference Ledyard J (1995) Public goods: a survey of experimental research. In: Kagel J, Roth A (eds) Handbook of experimental economics. Princeton University Press, Princeton Ledyard J (1995) Public goods: a survey of experimental research. In: Kagel J, Roth A (eds) Handbook of experimental economics. Princeton University Press, Princeton
go back to reference Levine D (1998) Modeling altruism and spitefulness in experiments. Rev Econ Dyn 1(3):593–622CrossRef Levine D (1998) Modeling altruism and spitefulness in experiments. Rev Econ Dyn 1(3):593–622CrossRef
go back to reference Li D (2007) Bargaining with history dependent preferences. J Econ Theory 136(1):695–708CrossRef Li D (2007) Bargaining with history dependent preferences. J Econ Theory 136(1):695–708CrossRef
go back to reference Li D, Wong YF (2009) Optimism and bargaining inefficiency. B E J Theor Econ 9(1):1–14CrossRef Li D, Wong YF (2009) Optimism and bargaining inefficiency. B E J Theor Econ 9(1):1–14CrossRef
go back to reference Montero M (2008) Altruism, spite and competition in bargaining games. Theor Decis 65(2):125–151CrossRef Montero M (2008) Altruism, spite and competition in bargaining games. Theor Decis 65(2):125–151CrossRef
go back to reference Pfrang D, Wittig S (2008) Negotiating office lease contracts: from a game-theory towards a behavioral view. J Eur Real Estate Res 1(1):88–105CrossRef Pfrang D, Wittig S (2008) Negotiating office lease contracts: from a game-theory towards a behavioral view. J Eur Real Estate Res 1(1):88–105CrossRef
go back to reference Possajennikov A (2000) On the evolutionary stability of altruistic and spiteful preferences. J Econ Behav Organ 42(1):125–129CrossRef Possajennikov A (2000) On the evolutionary stability of altruistic and spiteful preferences. J Econ Behav Organ 42(1):125–129CrossRef
go back to reference Roth A (1985) A note on risk aversion in a perfect equilibrium model of bargaining. Econometrica 53(1):207–212CrossRef Roth A (1985) A note on risk aversion in a perfect equilibrium model of bargaining. Econometrica 53(1):207–212CrossRef
go back to reference Rubinstein A (1982) Perfect equilibrium in a bargaining model. Econom J Econom Soc 50(1):97–109 Rubinstein A (1982) Perfect equilibrium in a bargaining model. Econom J Econom Soc 50(1):97–109
go back to reference Shin H, Baldick R (2018) Mitigating market risk for wind power providers via financial risk exchange. Energy Econ 71:344–358CrossRef Shin H, Baldick R (2018) Mitigating market risk for wind power providers via financial risk exchange. Energy Econ 71:344–358CrossRef
go back to reference Singh N (1997) Nash bargaining with the option to wait. Econ Lett 55(1):69–73CrossRef Singh N (1997) Nash bargaining with the option to wait. Econ Lett 55(1):69–73CrossRef
go back to reference Thaler R (1988) Anomalies: the ultimatum game. J Econ Perspect 2(4):195–206CrossRef Thaler R (1988) Anomalies: the ultimatum game. J Econ Perspect 2(4):195–206CrossRef
go back to reference Volij O, Winter E (2002) On risk aversion and bargaining outcomes. Games Econ Behav 41(1):120–140CrossRef Volij O, Winter E (2002) On risk aversion and bargaining outcomes. Games Econ Behav 41(1):120–140CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Bargaining Game with Altruistic and Spiteful Preferences
Authors
Zhongwei Feng
Chunqiao Tan
Jinchun Zhang
Qiang Zeng
Publication date
14-07-2020
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published in
Group Decision and Negotiation / Issue 2/2021
Print ISSN: 0926-2644
Electronic ISSN: 1572-9907
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-020-09685-z

Other articles of this Issue 2/2021

Group Decision and Negotiation 2/2021 Go to the issue

Premium Partner