Findings—Biased but Efficient: An Investigation of Coordination Facilitated by Asymmetric Dominance

References

• Amaldoss W., Jain S. David versus Goliath: An analysis of asymmetric mixed strategy games and experimental evidence. Management Sci. (2002) 48:972–991Link, Google Scholar
• Amaldoss W., Meyer R., Raju J., Rapoport A. Collaborating to compete. Marketing Sci. (2000) 19:105–126Link, Google Scholar
• Arrow K., Hogarth R., Reder M. Rationality of self and others in an economic system. Rational Choice: The Contrast Between Economics and Psychology (1986) (University of Chicago Press, Chicago) 201–216Google Scholar
• Ben-Porath E., Dekel E. Signaling future action and potential for sacrifice. J. Econom. Theory (1992) 57:36–51Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cachon G., Camerer C. F. Loss avoidance and forward induction in experimental coordination games. Quart. J. Econom. (1996) 111:165–194Crossref, Google Scholar
• Camerer C. F.Behavioral Game Theory: Experiments in Strategic Interaction (2003) (Russell Sage Foundation, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ) 336–405Google Scholar
• Camerer C. F., Ho T.-H. Experience-weighted attraction learning in coordination games: Probability rules, heterogeneity, and time variation. J. Math. Psych. (1998) 42:305–326Crossref, Google Scholar
• Camerer C., Ho T.-H., Chong J.-K. Sophisticated learning and strategic teaching. J. Econom. Theory (2002) 104:137–188Crossref, Google Scholar
• Camerer C. F., Ho T.-H., Chong J.-K. A cognitive hierarchy model of games. Quart. J. Econom. (2004) 119(3):861–898Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cooper R. W., Ross T. W. Product warranties and double moral hazard. Rand J. Econom. (1985) 16:103–113Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cooper R. W., Dejong D. V., Forsythe R., Ross T. W. Selection criteria in coordination games: Some experimental results. Amer. Econom. Rev. (1990) 80:218–233Google Scholar
• Cooper R. W., Dejong D. V., Forsythe R., Ross T. W. Communication in coordination games. Quart. J. Econom. (1992) 107:739–771Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dale D. J., Morgan J., Rosenthal R. W. Coordination through reputations: A laboratory experiment. Games Econom. Behav. (2002) 38:52–88Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dhar R., Simonson I. The effect of forced choice on choice. J. Marketing Res. (2003) 40:146–160Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hamilton R. Why do people suggest what they do not want? Using context effects to influence others' choices. J. Consumer Res. (2003) 29(March):492–506Crossref, Google Scholar
• Heath T., Chatterjee S. Asymmetric decoy effects on lower-quality versus higher-quality brands: Meta-analytic and experimental evidence. J. Consumer Res. (1995) 22:268–284Crossref, Google Scholar
• Herne K. The effects of decoy gambles on individual choice. Experiment. Econom. (1999) 2:31–40Crossref, Google Scholar
• Highhouse S. Context-dependent selection: The effects of decoy and phantom job candidates. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes (1996) 65:68–76Crossref, Google Scholar
• Huber J., Payne J. W., Puto C. Adding asymmetrically dominated alternatives: Violations of regularity and the similarity hypothesis. J. Consumer Res. (1982) 9:90–98Crossref, Google Scholar
• Katz M., Shapiro C. Network externalities, competition and compatibility. Amer. Econom. Rev. (1985) 75:424–440Google Scholar
• Kivetz R., Netzer O., Srinivasan V. Alternative models for capturing the compromise effect. J. Marketing Res. (2004) 41(3):237–257Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kohli R., Jedidi K. Representation and inference of lexicographic preference models and their variants. Marketing Sci. (2007) 26(3):380–399Link, Google Scholar
• Kreps D., Sobel J., Aumann R., Hart S. Signalling. Handbook of Game Theory (1994) 2(Elsevier, Amsterdam) 849–867Google Scholar
• Lim N., Ho T. Designing price contracts for boundedly rational customers: Does the number of blocks matter? Marketing Sci. (2007) 26(3):312–326Link, Google Scholar
• Luce D., Raiffa H.Games and Decisions: Introduction and Critical Survey (1957) (Wiley, New York) Google Scholar
• McKelvey R., Palfrey T. Quantal response equilibrium for normal form games. Games Econom. Behav. (1995) 10:6–38Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mehta J., Starmer C., Sugden R. An experimental investigation of pure coordination games. Amer. Econom. Rev. (1994) 84:658–673Google Scholar
• Mitra D., Golder P. How does objective quality affect perceived quality? Short-term effects, long-term effects and asymmetries. Marketing Sci. (2006) 25(3):230–247Link, Google Scholar
• Ochs J., Kagel J., Roth A. Coordination problems. The Handbook of Experimental Economics (1995) (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ) 195–251Google Scholar
• Padmanabhan V., Rao R. Warranty policy and extended service contracts: Theory and application to automobiles. Marketing Sci. (1993) 12:230–247Link, Google Scholar
• Parkhurst G., Shogren J., Bastian C. Repetition, communication and coordination failure. Experiment. Econom. (2004) 7:141–152Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rapoport A., Amaldoss W. Mixed strategies and iterative elimination of strongly dominated strategies: An experimental investigation of states of knowledge. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. (2000) 42:483–521Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rapoport A., Amaldoss W. Mixed strategy play in single-stage first-price all-pay auctions with symmetric players. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. (2004) 54:585–607Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rapoport A., Guyer M. A taxonomy of 2 × 2 games. General Systems (1966) 11:203–214Google Scholar
• Rieskamp J., Busemeyer J., Mellers B. Extending the bounds of rationality: A review of research on preferential choice. (2004) . Unpublished manuscript, Center for Adaptive Behavior and Cognition, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, BerlinGoogle Scholar
• Roth A. E., Erev I. Learning in extensive-form games: Experimental data and simple dynamic models in the intermediate term. Games Econom. Behav. (1995) 8:164–212Crossref, Google Scholar
• Russell B.Common Sense and Nuclear Warfare (1959) (Simon and Schuster, New York) Google Scholar
• Schelling T.The Strategy of Conflict (1960) (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• Shafir S., Waite T., Smith B. Context-dependent violations of rational choice in Honey Bees (Apis mellifera) and Gray Jays (Perisoreus Canadensis). Behav. Ecology Sociobiology (2002) 51:180–187Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simonson I. Choice based on reasons: The case of attraction and compromise effects. J. Consumer Res. (1989) 16:158–174Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simonson I., Tversky A. Choice in context: Tradeoff contrast and extremeness aversion. J. Marketing Res. (1992) 29:281–295Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tversky A., Simonson I. Context-dependent preferences. Management Sci. (1993) 39(10):1179–1189Link, Google Scholar
• Van Huyck J. B., Battalio R. C., Beil R. O. Tacit coordination games, strategic uncertainty, and coordination failure. Amer. Econom. Rev. (1990) 80:234–248Google Scholar
• Van Huyck J. B., Battalio R. C., Beil R. O. Strategic uncertainty, equilibrium selection, and coordination failure in average opinion games. Quart. J. Econom. (1991) 106:885–910Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wedell D. H. Distinguishing among models of contextually induced preference reversals. J. Econom. Psych.: Learn., Memory, Cognition (1991) 17:767–778Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wedell D. H., Pettibone J. C. Using judgments to understand decoy effects in choice. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes (1996) 67:324–344Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wilcox N. Theories of learning in games and heterogeneity bias. Econometrica (2006) 74(5):1271–1292Crossref, Google Scholar