Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Recognition probability in legislative bargaining

Bibliographic Data

ID13015673
AuthorsNatalie Lee (0000-0002-6335-7934, University of Amsterdam, corresponding author), Ravideep Sethi (0000-0001-8037-582X, University of Utah)
Year2023
Volume11
Issue2
Pages202-223
Publication date2023-09-18
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Experimental Political Science (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2052-2630 • E-ISSN: 2052-2649
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/xps.2023.26
OpenAlexW4386833736
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited36

In legislative bargaining, the proposer is often able to extract a greater proportion of the surplus. However, a higher likelihood of being selected as the proposer can backfire, as it may reduce the probability that the agent is included in a winning coalition. We experimentally test the theoretical prediction of potentially negative returns to recognition probability in two-period legislative bargaining noted in Baron and Ferejohn (1989). We find that higher recognition probability benefits subjects in all treatments, except one in which we automate the second period. It is because proposers often favor the member with the greater recognition probability as a coalition partner, and such tendency varies depending on the proposer’s recognition probability, counter to the theoretical prediction. In all treatments, a vast majority of subjects exhibit a strict preference for higher recognition probability

Econometrics · Economics · Legislature · Microeconomics · Political science · Preference · Probability model · Statistics · Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies · Game Theory and Voting Systems · Law · Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems · Mathematics

  • Sharing the burden of negative externalities

    Open Access•Andrzej Baranski, Duk Gyoo Kim•Ecological Economics•2024

  • Perfect Equilibrium in a Bargaining Model

    Ariel Rubinstein•Econometrica•1982

  • An Experimental Study of the Centipede Game

    Richard D Mckelvey, Thomas R Palfrey•Econometrica•1992

  • oTree—An open-source platform for laboratory, online, and field experiments

    Open Access•Daniel L Chen, Martin Schonger et al.•Journal of Behavioral and…•2016

  • Fairness in Simple Bargaining Experiments

    Open Access•Robert Forsythe, Joel L Horowitz et al.•Games and Economic Behavior•1994

  • Self-Interest, Inequality, and Entitlement in Majoritarian Decision-Making

    Daniel Diermeier, Sean Gailmard•Quarterly Journal of Political…•2006

  • Political resource allocation, controlled agendas, and the status quo

    Open Access•Thomas Romer, Howard Rosenthal et al.•Public Choice•1978

  • Decision costs in legislative bargaining

    Open Access•Luis Miller, Christoph Vanberg•Public Choice•2013

  • Distribution of surplus in sequential bargaining with endogenous recognition

    Open Access•Huseyin Yildirim, Hüseyin Yıldırım•Public Choice•2010

  • Agenda Control, Committee Capture, and the Dynamics of Institutional Politics

    Open Access•Jonathan Bendor, Terry M Moe•American Political Science Review•1986

  • Bargaining in Legislatures

    Open Access•David P Baron, John Ferejohn et al.•American Political Science Review•1989

  • Bargaining in Legislatures

    Guillaume R Fréechette, John H Kagel et al.•American Political Science Review•2003

  • Birds of a Feather

    Miller Mcpherson, L Smith-Lovin et al.•Annual Review of Sociology•2001

  • Homophily in collaborations among US House Representatives, 1981-2018

    Open Access•Z P Neal, Rachel Domagalski et al.•Social Networks•2022

Citations per year0.5
Citation span2024 - 2024 (1)
Highly citedNo

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae