Economics Dictionary of ArgumentsHome
| |||
|
| |||
| Agreement: In philosophy, an agreement refers to a mutual understanding or consensus between individuals or parties regarding a particular concept, proposition, or course of action, often reached through discussion, negotiation, or argumentation. Whether an understanding has been reached can only be determined by a third party._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. | |||
| Author | Concept | Summary/Quotes | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Experimental Psychology on Agreement - Dictionary of Arguments
Parisi I 107 Agreements/Experimental Psychology/Wilkinson-Ryan: Experimental psychology can help identify what kinds of roadblocks particularly affect dyads trying to reach an agreement over a contentious issue, insofar as bargaining over a scarce resource is a context that can be reasonably replicated in simulated or real negotiation tasks in the laboratory. Parisi I 108 Linda Babcock and George Loewenstein’s studies on self-serving biases are at the center of these studies. Their core insight was that not only do parties systematically overestimate the value of their claims, but that they also overestimate the similarity of their preferred judgment to the fair judgment (Loewenstein et al., 1993)(1). They used a hypothetical case and put subjects into pairs, with one subject playing plaintiff and one playing defendant, to negotiate the settlement of an automobile accident claim. Each subject was given the same set of case materials, and they were all told that a real judge had read the same materials and had made a decision about whether or not compensation was due to the plaintiff and if so, how much. Before the negotiation, subjects were asked to, in writing, predict the judge’s actual award and also to report what would be a fair settlement. Subjects randomly assigned to be the defendant thought a fair settlement was almost $18,000 lower than the subjects who were assigned to be plaintiffs. Roles/veil of ignorance: In an additional iteration of this study, subjects were randomly assigned to learn their role either before or after reading the case materials and offering their private assessments of the likely and fair outcomes, respectively (Babcock et al., 1995)(2). When subjects read the materials and made the predictions in full knowledge of their own roles, they showed much stronger biases. Indeed, in the eventual settlement task, more than a quarter of those negotiations did not reach settlement, but only 6% of the subjects who formed their impressions prior to knowing their own roles were unable to come to an agreement. >Fairness/Experimental psychology, >Apologies/Experimental psychology, >Dispute resolution/Experimental psychology. 1. Loewenstein, George, Samuel Issacharoff, Colin Camerer, and Linda Babcock (1993). “Self-Serving Assessments of Fairness and Pretrial Bargaining.” Journal of Legal Studies 22: 135–159. 2. Babcock, Linda, George Loewenstein, Samuel Issacharoff, and Colin Camerer (1995). “Biased Judgments Of Fairness In Bargaining.” American Economic Review 85: 1337–1343. Wilkinson-Ryan, Tess. „Experimental Psychology and the Law“. In: Parisi, Francesco (ed) (2017). The Oxford Handbook of Law and Economics. Vol 1: Methodology and Concepts. NY: Oxford University Press._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. Translations: Dictionary of Arguments The note [Concept/Author], [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] resp. "problem:"/"solution:", "old:"/"new:" and "thesis:" is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition. |
Experimental Psychology Parisi I Francesco Parisi (Ed) The Oxford Handbook of Law and Economics: Volume 1: Methodology and Concepts New York 2017 |
||
> Counter arguments against Experimental Psychology
> Counter arguments in relation to Agreement
