Skip to main content Skip to main navigation menu Skip to site footer
BUSINESS & MANAGEMENT STUDIES:
AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL
Published: 2019-01-03

SHARING IS BEAUTIFUL: AN APPLICATION OF ULTIMATUM GAME

Kastamonu Üniversitesi

Abstract

Economics is a science which is based on decisions of individuals who aims to satisfy their needs. Economic theory which is originated from west is developed by assuming that human makes rational and selfish decisions. Homo economicus individual does not share and interest in only his/her benefits. Ultimatum game is usually used in analysing decision mechanisms of human. This game shows that individual whether prefers selfish choices or fair choices. Researches show that individuals prefer fair alternatives. The aim of this research is to determine preferences of individuals in Turkish society. To this aim we conducted an experiment in students of Kastamonu University Economics and Administrative Sciences. As a result of this research, it is found that individuals are more willing to share and do not act rationally when they think that distribution is not fair.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Akalın, G. and Dilek, S. (2007a), “Belirsizlik Altında Tüketicilerin Kararları”, ZKÜ Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 3,6, s:33-48.
  2. Akalın, G. and Dilek, S. (2007b), “Belirsizlik Altında Firma Kararlarının İncelenmesi”, Marmara Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, XXIII, 2, s: 45-61
  3. Akerlof, G. and Kranton R. (2000), “Economics and Identity” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 115(3), 717-749
  4. Charness, G. and Gneezy, U. (2008),” What’s In A Name? Anonymity and Social Distance In Dictator and Ultimatum Games”, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 68, 29-35
  5. Dilek, S; Küçük, O. and Özdirek, R. (2017), “Homo Economicus mu? İslami İnsan mı?”, Uluslararası Ekonomik Araştırmalar Dergisi, 3(4), 635-641.
  6. Dilek, S. (2017). Oyun Teorisi Eşliğinde Sanayi Ekonomisi. Seçkin Yayınları
  7. Dilek, S. (2007). İktisadi Ajanların Belirsizlik Altında Karar Verme Mekanizmaları. Marmara Üniversitesi SBE doktora tezi. Danışman: Prof.Dr. Gülsüm Akalın
  8. Easterlin, R. (1974), “Does Economic Growth Improve the Human Lot?”, Nations and Households in Economic Growth: Essays in Honor of Moses Abramovitz, Ed: Paul A. David and Melvin W. Reder, New York: Academic Press, Inc., pp.89-125. http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/04/16/business/Easterlin1974.pdf
  9. Güth, W., Schmittberger, R. and Schwarze, B. (1982), “An Experimental Analysis of Ultimatum Bargaining”. Journal of Economic Behaviour and Organization, 3, 367-388.
  10. Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. (1979), “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk”, Econometrica, 47(2), 263-292.
  11. Kahneman, D. (2003), “A Psychological Perspective on Economics”, The American Economic Review; 93(2), 162-168
  12. Karabacak, H. (2018), Yeni Başlayanlar İçin Oyun Teorisi. Seçkin Yayınları.
  13. Katona, G. (1951), Psychological Analysis of Economic Behavior, New York: McGraw-Hill.
  14. Keskin, A. and Gülsen, A. (2015), “The Power of Sharing and Increasing Social Marginal Utility”. Sakarya İktisat Dergisi. 4(2). 94-108.
  15. Kitapçı, İ. (2017), “Rasyonaliteden İrrasyonaliteye: Davranışsal İktisat Yaklaşımı ve Bilişsel Önyargılar”, Maliye Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3(1), 85-102.
  16. Koenigs, M. and Tranel, D. (2007), “Irrational Decision-Making After Ventromedial Prefrontal Damage: Evidence From The Ultimatum Game”. The Journal of Neuroscience. 27(4).
  17. Kurtoğlu, R. (2017), NöroFinans Küresel Para Savaşları ve Davranış Ekonomisi. Destek Yayınları.
  18. Kurtulmuş, N. (1989), “İki Farklı İnsan Modelinin Analizi: Ekonomik İnsan- Davranışçı İnsan”, İktisat Fakültesi Mecmuası, 47(1-4).
  19. Küçüksucu, M., Konya, Sevilay and Karaçor, Z. (2017), “Davranışsal İktisat Ekseninde İktisatta Psikolojik Arka Plan”. 2nd International Congress on Political, Economic and Social Studies (ICPESS), 19-22 May 2017.
  20. Leibenstein, H. (1966), “Allocative efficiency vs. 'x-efficiency”. American Economic Review, 56, 392-415
  21. Morgan, G. A., Leech, N. L., Gloeckner, G. W. and Barrett, K. C. (2004), SPSS for Introductory statistics: Use and interpretation. Psychology Press.
  22. Oosterbeek, H., Sloof, R. and van de Kuilen, G. (2004), “Cultural Differences in Ultimatum Game Experiments: Evidence From A Meta-Analysis”, Experimental Economics, 7, 171-188
  23. Simon, H. (1955), “A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice”, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69(1): pp 99-118.
  24. Şen, A. (2016). “Eğitim ile Bencillik Arasındaki İlişki: Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Örneği”, İnsan ve Toplum Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi. 5(7), 1892-1904.
  25. Thaler, R. (1988), “Anomalies The Ultimatum Game”, The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2.
  26. Yalçıntaş, M. (2015), “Ekonomik Karar Almada Adalet ve Oyun Teorisi”. Maliye Finans Yazıları, 103, 2472-74
  27. Yavuzaslan, K. (2018a), “Ekonomideki Tercihlerde, Demografik Farklılıkların Önemi: Davranışsal ve Deneysel İktisat Çalışmaları”. Social Sciences Studies Journal. 4(19). 2152-2158
  28. Yavuzaslan, K. (2018b), “Deneysel İktisat ve Kültürel Farklılıkların Deneysel İktisatla İfadesi”, Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, sayı 33, Denizli, s. 217-231
  29. Yiğit, A. G. (2018), “Davranışsal İktisadın Anlaşılmasına Yönelik Bir Literatür Taraması”, MCBÜ Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. 16(2). 161

How to Cite

DİLEK, S., & KESGİNGÖZ, H. (2019). SHARING IS BEAUTIFUL: AN APPLICATION OF ULTIMATUM GAME. Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 6(4), 822-834. https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v6i4.334