Skip to main content

auctions (experiments)

  • Chapter

Part of the book series: The New Palgrave Economics Collection ((NPHE))

Abstract

Experimental work in auctions interacts with theory, providing a basis for testing and modifying theoretical developments. It has advantages and disadvantages relative to empirical work with field data, so that we view the two as complimentary. Experimental work is used increasingly as a test bed for new auction formats such as the Federal Communication Commission’s (FCC) sale of spectrum (air-wave) rights.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  • Ariely, D., Ockenfels, A. and Roth, A.E. 2005. An experimental analysis of ending rules in internet auctions. RAND Journal of Economics 36, 890–907.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avery, C. and Kagel, J.H. 1997. Second-price auctions with asymmetric payoffs: an experimental investigation. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy 6, 573–604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Battalio, R.C., Kogut, C.A. and Meyer, D.J. 1990. Individual and market bidding in a Vickrey first-price auction: varying market size and information. In Advances in Behavioral Economics, vol. 2, ed. L. Green and J.H. Kagel. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bazeramn, M.H. and Samuelson, W.F. 1983. I won the auction but don’t want the prize. Journal of Conflict Resolution 27, 618–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casari, M., Ham, J.C. and Kagel, J.H. 2007. Selection bias, demographic effects and ability effects in common value auction experiments. American Economic Review 97, 1278–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coppinger, V.M., Smith, V.L. and Titus, J.A. 1980. Incentives and behavior in English, Dutch and sealed-bid auctions. Economic Inquiry 43, 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cox, J., Roberson, B. and Smith, V.L. 1982. Theory and behavior of single object auctions. In Research in Experimental Economics, ed. V.L. Smith. Greenwich: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dorsey, R. and Razzolini, L. 2003. Explaining overbidding in first price auctions using controlled lotteries. Experimental Economics 6, 123–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dyer, D., Kagel, J.H. and Levin, D. 1989a. Resolving uncertainty about the number of bidders in independent private-value auctions: an experimental analysis. RAND Journal of Economics 20, 268–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dyer, D., Kagel, J.H. and Levin, D. 1989b. A comparison of naive and experienced bidders in common value offer auctions: a laboratory analysis. Economic Journal 99, 108–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garratt, R., Walker, M. and Wooders, J. 2004. Behavior in second-price auctions by highly experienced eBay buyers and sellers. Working Paper No. 1181, Department of Economics, UC Santa Barbara.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goeree, J.K., Holt, C.A. and Ledyard, J.O. 2006. An Experimental Comparison of the FCC’s Combinatorial and Non-Combinatorial Simultaneous Multiple Round Auctions. Prepared for the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau of the Federal Communications Commission. Online. Available at http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/data/papersAndStudies/fcc_final_report_071206.pdf, accessed 1 February 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goeree, J.K. and Offerman, T. 2002. Efficiency in auctions with private and common values: an experimental study. American Economic Review 92, 625–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holt, C.A., Jr. and Sherman, R. 1994. The loser’s curse and bidder’s bias. American Economic Review 84, 642–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Isaac, M. and James, D. 2000. Just who are you calling risk averse? Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 20, 177–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kagel, J.H., Harstad, R.M. and Levin, D. 1987. Information impact and allocation rules in auctions with affiliated private values: a laboratory study. Econometrica 55, 1275–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kagel, J.H. and Levin, D. 1986. The winner’s curse and public information in common value auctions. American Economic Review 76, 894–920.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kagel, J.H. and Levin, D. 1991. The winner’s curse and public information in common value auctions: reply. American Economic Review 81, 362–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kagel, J.H. and Levin, D. 1993. Independent private value auctions: bidder behavior in first-, second- and third-price auctions with varying numbers of bidders. Economic Journal 103, 868–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kagel, J.H. and Levin, D. 1999. Common value auctions with insider information. Econometrica 67, 1219–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kagel, J.H. and Levin, D. 2001. Behavior in multi-unit demand auctions: experiments with uniform price and dynamic Vickrey auctions. Econometrica 69, 413–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kagel, J.H. and Levin, D. 2002. Bidding in common value auctions: a survey of experimental research. In Common Value Auctions and the Winner’s Curse. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kagel, J.H. and Levin, D. 2006. Implementing efficient multi-object auction institutions: an experimental study of the performance of boundedly rational agents. Mimeo, Ohio State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kagel, J.H., Levin, D., Battalio, R. and Meyer, D.J. 1989. First-price common value auctions: bidder behavior and the winner’s curse. Economic Inquiry 27, 241–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kagel, J.H. and Richard, J.F. 2001. Super-experienced bidders in first-price common value auctions: rules of thumb, Nash equilibrium bidding and the winner’s curse. Review of Economics and Statistics 83, 408–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klemperer, P. 1998. Auctions with almost common values: the ‘wallet game’ and its applications. European Economic Review 42, 757–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kwasnica, A.M., Ledyard, J.O., Porter, D. and DeMartini, C. 2005. A new and improved design for multiobject iterative auctions. Management Science 51, 419–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levin, D., Kagel, J.H. and Richard, J.F. 1996. Revenue effects and information processing in English common value auctions. American Economic Review 86, 442–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lind, B. and Plott, C.R. 1991. The winner’s curse: experiments with buyers and with sellers. American Economic Review 81, 335–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lucking-Reiley, D. 1999. Using field experiments to test equivalence between auction formats: magic on the internet. American Economic Review 89, 1062–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neugebauer, T. and Selten, R. 2006. Individual behavior of first-price auctions: the importance of information feedback in computerized experimental markets. Games and Economic Behavior 54, 183–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, D., Rassenti, S., Roopnarine, A. and Smith, V. 2003. Combinatorial auction design. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 100, 11153–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rose, S.L. and Kagel, J.H. 2005. Bidding in almost common value auctions: an experiment, mimeographed. Mimeo, Ohio State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, S.L. and Levin, D. 2005. An experimental investigation of the explosive effect in common value auctions. Mimeo, Ohio State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, A.E. and Ockenfels, A. 2002. Last-minute bidding and the rules for ending second-price auctions: evidence from eBay and Amazon auctions on the internet. American Economic Review 92, 1093–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salmon, T.C. and Wilson, B.J. 2008. Second chance offers versus sequential auctions: theory and behavior. Economic Theory 34, 47–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Copyright information

© 2010 Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Kagel, J.H., Levin, D. (2010). auctions (experiments). In: Durlauf, S.N., Blume, L.E. (eds) Behavioural and Experimental Economics. The New Palgrave Economics Collection. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230280786_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics