方法对比
并排查看您选择的方法；存在差异的行会高亮显示。
| 最后通牒博弈× | 独裁者博弈× | |
|---|---|---|
| 领域 | 心理学 | 心理学 |
| 方法族 | Hypothesis test | Hypothesis test |
| 起源年份≠ | 1982 | 1994 |
| 提出者≠ | Werner Güth, Rolf Schmittberger, and Bernd Schwarze | Robert Forsythe and colleagues |
| 类型≠ | Behavioral economics task | Allocation task |
| 开创性文献≠ | Güth, W., Schmittberger, R., & Schwarze, B. (1982). An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 3(4), 367-388. DOI ↗ | Forsythe, R., Horowitz, J. L., Savin, N. E., & Sefton, M. (1994). Fairness in simple bargaining experiments. Games and Economic Behavior, 6(3), 347-369. DOI ↗ |
| 别名 | Ultimatum Bargaining, Division Game | Allocation Game, Distribution Task |
| 相关 | 1 | 1 |
| 摘要≠ | The Ultimatum Game is a two-player economic decision-making task that reveals preferences for fairness and social norms. One player (proposer) receives money and offers a portion to a second player (responder). The responder accepts or rejects the offer; if accepted, both receive their share; if rejected, both receive nothing. Economic theory predicts responders should accept any positive offer (better than zero), yet responders often reject unfair offers. This gap between predictions and behavior reveals that fairness concerns, equity sensitivity, and social punishment shape economic decisions. | The Dictator Game is a simple economic decision task measuring generosity and prosocial behavior. One player (dictator) receives money and unilaterally decides how to allocate it between themselves and an anonymous second player (recipient). The recipient cannot reject the offer; they simply receive what the dictator gives. Unlike the Ultimatum Game, the dictator faces no punishment for selfishness. Thus, the Dictator Game reveals baseline generosity without strategic calculation, revealing intrinsic prosocial preferences. |
| ScholarGate数据集 ↗ |
|
|