2022
DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.4066820
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Guilt Aversion in (New) Games: Does Partners’ Vulnerability Matter?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 83 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Indeed, a standard equilibrium analysis has no compelling foundation for games played one-shot, like ours, and in experiments on other-regarding preferences (see section 6.2 ofAttanasi et al, 2016).11 Detailed best-reply analysis and predictions for the behavior of player A can be found in our previous working paper(Attanasi et al, 2022).12 In each game, we assume that B best-responds as if he had truly observed A's move. This holds by standard expected-utility maximization, except for the cases where B is certain that A has chosen Out.…”
mentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Indeed, a standard equilibrium analysis has no compelling foundation for games played one-shot, like ours, and in experiments on other-regarding preferences (see section 6.2 ofAttanasi et al, 2016).11 Detailed best-reply analysis and predictions for the behavior of player A can be found in our previous working paper(Attanasi et al, 2022).12 In each game, we assume that B best-responds as if he had truly observed A's move. This holds by standard expected-utility maximization, except for the cases where B is certain that A has chosen Out.…”
mentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Detailed best-reply analysis and predictions for the behavior of player A can be found in our previous working paper(Attanasi et al, 2022).15 In each game, we assume that B best-responds as if he had truly observed A's move. This holds by standard expected-utility maximization, except for the cases where B is certain that A has chosen Out.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%