Projects per year
Abstract
This paper reports an experimental investigation of Schelling’s theory of focal points that compares group and individual behaviour. We find that, when players’ interests are perfectly aligned, groups more often choose the salient option and achieve higher coordination success than individuals. However, in games with conflicts of interest, groups do not always perform better than individuals, especially when the degree of conflict is substantial. We also find that groups outperform individuals when identifying the solution to the coordination problem requires some level of cognitive sophistication. Finally, players that successfully identify the solution to this game also achieve greater coordination rates than other players in games with a low degree of conflict. This result raises the question of whether finding the focal point is more a matter of logic rather than imagination as Schelling argued.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 461-478 |
Number of pages | 18 |
Journal | Games and Economic Behavior |
Volume | 117 |
Early online date | 9 Aug 2019 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - Sep 2019 |
Keywords
- Groups
- Coordination
- Payoff-irrelevant cues
- cognition
Profiles
-
Stefania Sitzia
- School of Economics - Associate Professor in Economics
- Centre for Behavioural and Experimental Social Science - Member
- Behavioural Economics - Member
- Environment, Resources and Conflict - Member
Person: Research Group Member, Research Centre Member, Academic, Teaching & Research
Projects
- 1 Finished
-
Reconstructing normative economics on a foundation of mutual advantage
Sugden, R., Isoni, A. & Zheng, J.
1/01/16 → 30/06/21
Project: Research
File