Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-04T03:33:58.071Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Revisiting gender differences in ultimatum bargaining: experimental evidence from the US and China

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Shuwen Li Open the ORCID record for Shuwen Li [Opens in a new window] ,
Xiangdong Qin  and
Daniel Houser Open the ORCID record for Daniel Houser [Opens in a new window]
Shuwen Li*
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC, USA
Xiangdong Qin
Affiliation:
Antai College of Economics and Management, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China
Daniel Houser
Affiliation:
Department of Economics and the Interdisciplinary Center for Economic Science, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA
*
e-mail: lshuwen@uncc.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We report results from a replication of Solnick (Econ Inq 39(2):189, 2001), which finds using an ultimatum game that, in relation to males, more is demanded from female proposers and less is offered to female responders. We conduct Solnick’s (2001) game using participants from a large US university and a large Chinese university. We find little evidence of gender differences across proposer and responder decisions in both locations.

Keywords

Gender differencesCultural differencesLaboratory experimentUltimatum gameBargaining

JEL classification

C78: Bargaining Theory • Matching Theory Z10: General C92: Laboratory, Group Behavior J16: Economics of Gender • Non-labor Discrimination
Type
Replication Paper
Information
Journal of the Economic Science Association , Volume 4 , Issue 2 , December 2018 , pp. 180 - 190
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 Economic Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (https://doi.org/10.1007/s40881-018-0054-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

References

Andreoni, J., Castillo, M., Petrie, R. (2003). What do bargainers’ preferences look like? Experiments with a convex ultimatum game. American Economic Review, 93(3), 672–685. 10.1257/000282803322157034CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andreoni, J., Vesterlund, L. (2001). Which is the fair sex? Gender differences in altruism. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116(1), 293–312. 10.1162/003355301556419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ayres, I., Siegelman, P. (1995). Race and gender discrimination in bargaining for a new car. The American Economic Review, 85(3), 304–321.Google Scholar
Babcock, L., Laschever, S. (2009). Women don’t ask: Negotiation and the gender divide, Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Blau, F. D., Kahn, L. M. (2017). The gender wage gap: Extent, trends, and explanations. Journal of Economic Literature, 55(3), 789–865. 10.1257/jel.20160995CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castillo, M. E., Cross, P. J. (2008). Of mice and men: Within gender variation in strategic behavior. Games and Economic Behavior, 64(2), 421–432. 10.1016/j.geb.2008.01.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castillo, M., Petrie, R., Torero, M., Vesterlund, L. (2013). Gender differences in bargaining outcomes: A field experiment on discrimination. Journal of Public Economics, 99, 35–48. 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2012.12.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, Y., Li, S. X. (2009). Group identity and social preferences. American Economic Review, 99(1), 431–457. 10.1257/aer.99.1.431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Croson, R., Gneezy, U. (2009). Gender differences in preferences. Journal of Economic literature, 47(2), 448–474. 10.1257/jel.47.2.448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dittrich, M., Knabe, A., Leipold, K. (2014). Gender differences in experimental wage negotiations. Economic Inquiry, 52(2), 862–873. 10.1111/ecin.12060CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckel, C. C., Grossman, P. J. (2001). Chivalry and solidarity in ultimatum games. Economic Inquiry, 39(2), 171–188. 10.1111/j.1465-7295.2001.tb00059.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191. 10.3758/BF03193146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischbacher, U. (2007). z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments. Experimental Economics, 10(2), 171–178. 10.1007/s10683-006-9159-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gillen, B., Snowberg, E., & Yariv, L. (2018). Experimenting with measurement error: Techniques with applications to the Caltech cohort study. Journal of Political Economy. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/journals/jpe/forthcoming?mobileUi=0&.Google Scholar
Güth, W., Kocher, M. G. (2014). More than 30 years of ultimatum bargaining experiments: Motives, variations, and a survey of the recent literature. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 108, 396–409. 10.1016/j.jebo.2014.06.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hao, L., Houser, D. (2015). Adaptive procedures for the Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney test: Seven decades of advances. Communications in Statistics Theory and Methods, 44(9), 1939–1957. 10.1080/03610926.2012.762394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mullin, C. H., Reiley, D. H. (2006). Recombinant estimation for normal-form games, with applications to auctions and bargaining. Games and Economic Behavior, 54(1), 159–182. 10.1016/j.geb.2004.10.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saad, G., Gill, T. (2001). Sex differences in the ultimatum game: An evolutionary psychology perspective. Journal of Bioeconomics, 3(2–3), 171–193. 10.1023/A:1020583425623CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sandberg, S. (2013). Lean in: Women, work, and the will to lead, London: Random House.Google Scholar
Solnick, S. J. (2001). Gender differences in the ultimatum game. Economic Inquiry, 39(2),189. 10.1111/j.1465-7295.2001.tb00060.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutter, M., Bosman, R., Kocher, M. G., van Winden, F. (2009). Gender pairing and bargaining—Beware the same sex!. Experimental Economics, 12(3), 318–331. 10.1007/s10683-009-9217-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Li et al. supplementary material

Li et al. supplementary material
Download Li et al. supplementary material(File)
File 1 MB