Heike Hennig-Schmidt

The Framing of Games and the Psychology of Play

Psychological game theory can provide rational-choice-based framing effects; frames influence beliefs, beliefs influence motivations. We explain this theoretically and explore empirical relevance experimentally. In a 2×2 design of one-shot public good games we show that frames affect subjectʼs first- and second-order beliefs and contributions. From a psychological game-theoretic framework we derive two mutually compatible hypotheses about guilt aversion and reciprocity under which contributions are related to second- and first-order beliefs, respectively. Our results are consistent with either.

The Impact of Fairness on Decision Making — An Analysis of Different Video Experiments

Experimentally observed deviations of behavior from game theoretic predictions suggest that fairness does influence decision making. Fairness in the sense of equality has become an essential element of economic models aiming at explaining actual behavior (cf. Fehr and Schmidt, 1999; Bolton and Ockenfels, 2000). In this paper I will argue that equality is not the only fairness norm to be taken into account. More equity norms than equality exist, including inequality of payoffs. Since inequitable payoff allocations are advantageous for the one player and disadvantageous for the other, subjects may fall prey to a self-serving bias in their fairness perceptions. Opponents may adhere to different conceptions of fairness making agreement impossible. Using the video method (Hennig-Schmidt, 1999) I further show in a bargaining experiment that behavior is goal-oriented. Fairness criteria based on equity norms guide the formation and adaptation of aspiration levels.

Cooperation in Symmetric and Asymmetric Prisoner's Dilemma Games

We experimentally study the effect of asymmetry on cooperation in a 40 period prisoners dilemma game in fixed partner design. We distinguish between a high and low payoff symmetric prisoners dilemma and an asymmetric game combined out of both symmetric ones. Asymmetry significantly decreases cooperation, as low-type players are more likely to defect after mutual cooperation while high-type players initiate cooperation more often than the former. Asymmetry also has a significant negative effect on the stability of cooperation rendering long sequences of mutual cooperation extremely rare.

How Effective are Pay-for-Performance Incentives for Physicians? - A Laboratory Experiment

Recent reforms in health care have introduced a variety of pay-for-performance programs using financial incentives for physicians to improve the quality of care. Their effectiveness is, however, ambiguous as it is often difficult to disentangle the effect of financial incentives from the ones of various other simultaneous changes in the system. In this study we investigate the effects of introducing financial pay-for-performance incentives with the help of controlled laboratory experiments. In particular, we use fee-for-service and capitation as baseline payment schemes and test how additional pay-for-performance incentives affect the medical treatment of different patient types. Our results reveal that, on average, patients significantly benefit from introducing pay-forperformance, independently of hether it is combined with capitation or fee-for-service incentives. The magnitude of this effect is significantly influenced by the patient type, though. These results hold for medical and non-medical students. A cost-benefit analysis further demonstrates that, overall, the increase in patient benefits cannot overcompensate the additional costs associated with pay-for-performance. Moreover, our analysis of individual data reveals different types of responses to pay-for-performance incentives. We find some indication that pay-forperformance might crowd out the intrinsic motivation to care for patients. These insights help to understand the effects caused by introducing pay-for-performance schemes.

Determinants of Boundedly Rational Behavior

In Chapter 1 we pointed out that the rationality of subjects is bounded in many respects. Yet, experiments show that their typical behavior is not irrational but is based on reasonable systematic principles. Videotaping subjects’ decisions in our experiment provides us with the unique opportunity to assess regularities in their behavior by direct observation. The aim of our study is an explorative one: it was not designed to test hypotheses on expected outcomes or behavior. Rather, by looking at the actions of experimental subjects we wanted to find out on which, if any, principles people base their decisions. After having learned about the typical determinants of agents’ behavior in our experiment, we found that these principles are well-established in economic, but mainly in psychological literature.

Understanding Negotiations: A Video Approach in Experimental Gaming

Reinhard Selten since the beginning of his scientific career has been concerned with developing descriptive theories that take account of the boundedly rational behavior of human subjects. The concept of bounded rationality was introduced by Herbert Simon in the 1950s (Simon 1955, 1957), and Selten was immediately convinced by his arguments (Selten 1995). Together with a group of other researchers in Frankfurt around the economist Heinz Sauermann who shared the view that behavior of economic agents is not adequately modeled by “homo oeconomicus” theories Reinhard Selten started to run economic experiments and to develop a corresponding methodology already in the 1950s (see Sauermann and Selten 1967). In Selten’s own words: “We invented experimental economics”.

Incomplete and Asymmetric Surplus Information in Labor Relations

Numerous laboratory experiments show that workers reciprocate to high wages with high effort, when there is perfect information on the surplus created. Recent field experiments, however, suggest that trust and reciprocity may be lower or absent when the information is incomplete.We report a laboratory experiment with symmetric and asymmetric incomplete surplus information in a bilateral gift exchange setting.We find that trust and reciprocity have a significant positive effect on wages, effort and efficiency.But, all three are substantially lower under incomplete than under complete information.The negative impact on wages and efficiency is even greater with information asymmetry.

Emotion at Stake—The Role of Stake Size and Emotions in a Power-to-Take Game Experiment in China with a Comparison to Europe

This paper experimentally investigates how monetary incentives and emotions influence behavior in a two-player power-to-take game (PTTG). In this game, one player can claim any part of the others endowment (take rate), and the second player can respond by destroying any part of his or her own endowment. The experiment is run in China. We further compare our findings with the behavior of two European subject pools. Our results give new insights regarding emotion regulation. Even though stake size does not appear to matter for take rates and destruction rates, it does matter for the reaction function of the responder regarding the take rate. When stakes are high, there is less destruction for low and intermediate take rates, and more destruction for high take rates, compared to relatively low stakes. Under low incentives, ‘hot’ anger-type emotions are important for destruction, while ‘cool’ contempt becomes prominent under high monetary incentives. These results suggest emotion regulation in the high-stake condition. Moreover, emotions are found to fully mediate the impact of the take rate on destruction when stakes are low, whereas they only partially do so if stakes are high. Comparing the low-stakes data for China with existing European data, we find similarities in behavior, emotions and emotion intensities, as well as the full mediation of the take rate by emotions. We find some differences related to the type of emotions that are important for destruction. Whereas anger and joy are important in both, in addition, irritation and fear play a role in China, while this holds for contempt in the EU.

In Wrong Anticipation – Miscalibrated Beliefs between Germans, Israelis, and Palestinians

The reconcilability of actions and beliefs in inter-country relationships, either in business or politics, is of vital importance as incorrect beliefs on foreigners’ behavior can have serious implications. We study a typical inter-country interaction by means of a controlled laboratory investment game experiment in Germany, Israel and Palestine involving 400 student participants in total. An investor has to take a risky decision in a foreign country that involves transferring money to an investee/allocator. We found a notable constellation of calibrated and un-calibrated beliefs. Within each country, transfer standards exist, which investees correctly anticipate within their country. However, across countries these standards differ. By attributing the standard of their own environment to the other countries investees are remarkably bad in predicting foreign investors’ behavior. The tendency to ignore this potential difference can be a source of misinterpreting motives in cross-country interaction. Foreigners might perceive behavior as unfavorable or favorable differentiation, even though—unknown to them—investors actually treat fellow-country people and foreigners alike.

Asymmetric outside options in ultimatum bargaining: a systematic analysis

We set up a laboratory experiment to investigate systematically how varying the magnitude of outside options—the payoffs that materialize in case of a bargaining breakdown—of proposers and responders influences players’ demands and game outcomes (rejection rates, payoffs, efficiency) in ultimatum bargaining. We find that proposers as well as responders gradually increase their demands when their respective outside option increases. Rejections become more likely when the asymmetry in the players’ outside options is large. Generally, the predominance of the equal split decreases with increasing outside options. From a theoretical benchmark perspective we find a low predictive power of equilibria based on self-regarding preferences or inequity aversion. However, proposers and responders seem to be guided by the equity principle (Selten, The equity principle in economic behavior. Decision Theory, Social Ethics, Issues in Social Choice. Gottinger, Hans-Werner and Leinfellner, Werner, pp 269–281, 1978), while they apply equity rules inconsistently and self-servingly.