Puzzello, Daniela (2006): Tie-Breaking Rules and Divisibility in Experimental Duopoly Markets. Published in: Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization , Vol. 67, (2008): pp. 164-179.
Download (528kB) | Preview
We investigate pricing behavior of sellers in duopoly markets with posted prices and market power. The two treatment variables are given by tie-breaking rules and divisibility of the price space. The first treatment variable deals with the rule under which demanded units are allocated between sellers in case of a price tie. A change in divisibility is modeled by making the sellers’ price space finer or coarser. We find that the incidence of perfect collusion is significantly higher under the sharing tie-breaking rule than under the random (coin-toss) one, especially when the price space is less divisible.
|Item Type:||MPRA Paper|
|Original Title:||Tie-Breaking Rules and Divisibility in Experimental Duopoly Markets|
|Keywords:||Collusion; Tie-breaking rules; Divisibility; Bertrand model|
|Subjects:||C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C9 - Design of Experiments
L - Industrial Organization > L1 - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance
|Depositing User:||Daniela Puzzello|
|Date Deposited:||06. Oct 2008 00:15|
|Last Modified:||26. Feb 2013 13:35|
 D. Alger, Laboratory tests of equilibrium predictions with disequilibrium price data, Review of Economic Studies 54 (1987), 105-145.
 B. L. Benson and M. D. Faminow, The impact of experience on prices and profits in experimental duopoly markets, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 9 (1988), 345-365.
 J. Brown-Kruse, Contestability in the presence of an alternative market: an experimental investigation, RAND Journal of Economics 22 (1991), 136-147.
 J. Brown-Kruse, S. Rassenti, S.S. Reynolds and V. Smith, Bertrand-Edgeworth competition in experimental markets, Econometrica 62 (1994), 343-371.
 T. Cason and D. Davis, Price communications in a multi-market context: an experimental investigation, Review of Industrial Organization 10 (1995), 769- 787.
 O. Compte, F. Jenny, and P. Rey, Capacity constraints, mergers and collusion, European Economic Review 46 (2002), p.1-29.
 W. J. Conover, Practical Nonparametric Statistics, John Wiley and Sons, 1999.
 D. Davis and C. A. Holt, Market power and mergers in laboratory markets with posted prices, RAND Journal of Economics 25 (1994), 467-487.
 D. Davis, C. A. Holt and A. Villamil, Supra-competitive prices and market power in posted-offer experiments, Market Power, Mark Isaac (Ed.), Westview Press, 2002.
 D. Davis and B. Wilson, Collusion in procurement auctions: an experimental examination, Economic Inquiry 40 (2002), 213-230.
 E. Dechenaux, and D. Kovenock, Endogenous rationing, price dispersion, and collusion in capacity constrained supergames, Krannert working paper n. 1164, Purdue University, 2003.
 R. Deneckere, D. Kovenock and R. Lee, A model of price leadership based on consumer loyalty, The Journal of Industrial Economics 40 (1992), 147-156.
 M. Dufwenberg and U. Gneezy, Price competition and market concentration: an experimental study, International Journal of Industrial Organization 18 (2000), 7-22.
 N. Fabra, N-H. von der Fehr, and D. Harbor, Designing electricity auctions, Rand Journal of Economics, forthcoming, 2005.
 R. Feinberg and T. Husted, An experimental test of discount-rate effects on collusive behaviour in duopoly markets, The Journal of Industrial Economics 41 (1993), 153-160.
 U. Fischbacher, z-Tree - Zurich Toolbox for Readymade Economic Experiments - Experimenter’s Manual, Working Paper Nr. 21, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics, University of Zurich, 1999.
 L. Fouraker and S. Siegel, Bargaining Behavior, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1963.
 J. Friedman and A. Hoggatt, An experiment in noncooperative oligopoly, Research in Experimental Economics 1, Greenwich, Conn.:JAI press, 1980.
 G. Harrison, Experimental evaluation of the contestable markets hypothesis, Public Regulation: New Perspectives on Institutions and Policies, E. E. Bailey (Ed.), Cambridge: MIT Press, 1987.
 C. A. Holt, The exercise of market power in laboratory experiments, Journal of Law and Economics 32 (1989), 107-130.
 C. A. Holt and F. Solis-Soberon, The calculation of mixed-strategy equilibria in posted offer markets, Research in Experimental Economics 5, R. M. Isaac, ed. Greenwich: JAI Press, 1992.
 S. Huck, S. Müller, and H.-T. Normann, Stackelberg beats Cournot-on collusion and efficiency in experimental markets, Economic Journal 111 (2001), 749-765.
 S. Huck, H.-T. Normann, and J. Oechssler, Two are few and four are many: number effects in experimental oligopolies, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 53 (2004), 435-446.
 S. Huck, H.-T. Normann, and J. Oechssler, Does information about competitors’ actions increase or decrease competition in experimental oligopoly markets? International Journal of Industrial Organization 18 (2000), 39-58.
 R. P. Preston McAfee and J. McMillan, Bidding rings, American Economic Review 82 (1992), 579-99.
 Richard D. McKelvey, Andrew M. McLennan and Theodore L. Turocy, Gambit: Software Tools for Game Theory, Version 0.97.0.6. http://econweb.tamu.edu/gambit, 2004.  C. Narasimhan, Competitive promotional strategies, The Journal of Business 61 (1988), 427-449.
 C. R. Plott and V. Smith, An Experimental Examination of Two Exchange Institutions, Review of Economic Studies 45 (1978), 133-53.
 R. Savani and B. von Stenge, Exponentially Many Steps for Finding a Nash Equilibrium in a Bimatrix Game, CDAM Research Report LSE-CDAM-2004- 03, 2004.
 N-H. von der Fehr and D. Harbor, Spot market competition in the UK electricity industry, Economic Journal 103 (1993), 531-46.