Assignment Remit Programme Title Master Programs Module Title LM Behavioral and Experimental

Assignment Remit
Programme Title
Master Programs
Module Title
LM Behavioral and Experimental Economics
Module Code
27184
Assignment Title
Experimental and Behavioural Economics
Level
LM
Weighting
100%
Lecturers
Amalia Di Girolamo
Hand Out Date
15/07/2021
Due Date & Time
12/08/2021
12.00 noon
Feedback Post Date
Click here to enter a date.
Assignment Format
Essay
Assignment Length
2000 words absolute maximum
Submission Format
Online
Individual
Assignment:
Please answer ONE of the following TWO questions. Each question has three sub-parts (a, b, c) – please answer all parts of the question you attempt.
Whichever question you select, you will write three short essays. It is up to you how you use the words at your disposal, but the total word count should not exceed 2000 words. This is a strict maximum word limit. Note that in-text referencing is included in the word count, but the reference list at the end is not. All referencing should be in Harvard style. Weightings appear after each sub-part.
Question 1
Consider the Dictator Game. Explain the structure of the game. Discuss the experimental economics evidence which shows that subjects deviate from the Nash Equilibrium prediction. Consider the Ultimatum Game as well. Discuss the main differences between the Dictator Game and the Ultimatum Game, and how the two games can distinguish between the different motives of giving. (30%)
Consider the Gift Exchange game. Explain the structure of the game detailing the possible strategies of the players, the Nash Equilibrium and how the players can deviate from the Nash Equilibrium. Compare the gift exchange game with the trust game, and critically discuss the main differences between the two games. (30%)
Consider the article “Toward an Understanding of the Economics of Charity: Evidence from a Field Experiment” by Landry et al. (2005). Describe the Experimental Design and summarise the main results of the Field Experiment. You should describe the treatments designed by the authors and their meanings, the theoretical model is not relevant in the discussion. Then you should summarise the results found in the Field Experiments for each treatment. (40%)
Joyce, Berg, John Dickhaut, and Kevin McCabe, (1995). “Trust, Reciprocity, and Social History.” Games and Economic Behavior 122-142.
Camerer, C., and Fehr, E., (2002). Measuring Social Norms and Preferences using Experimental Games: A Guide for Social Scientists. Institute for Empirical Research in Economics, Working Paper No. 97.
Fehr, E., Kirchsteiger, G., & Riedl, A. (1993). Does Fairness Prevent Market Clearing? An Experimental Investigation. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108(2), 437-459.
Landry, C., A. Lange, J.A. List, M.K. Price, and Nicholas Rupp (2006), “Toward an Understanding of the Economics of Charity: Evidence from a Field Experiment,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 121(2): 747-782. Do not bother about the model but just focus on the empirical results.
Question 2
Holt and Laury (2002) propose the Multiple Price List method as a laboratory risk elicitation method. Describe this risk elicitation method highlighting its advantages and disadvantages. (30%)
Consider Prospect Theory introduced by Kahneman and Tversky (1979). Discuss the Value Function. You should give a detailed explanation on how the authors construct the Value Function and which are its main characteristics. (30%)
Consider the “Three Variants on the Allais Example” by John Conlisk (1989). Describe the “Three Steps Allais Question” experiment and how the author proposes to solve the Allais Paradox. (40%)
Conlisk, John, “Three Variants on the Allais Example,” The American Economic Review, Vol. 79, No. 3,Jun., 1989 pp. 392-396 (only the introduction, paragraph one The Basic Allais Questions, and paragraph two The Three-Step Allais Questions: The First Test).
Holt, C., & Laury, S. (2002). “Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects. The American Economic Review.” 92(5), 1644-1655.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk.” Econometrica, 47(2), 263-291.
Grading Criteria:
Mark awarded
The higher mark (100, 88, 78, etc.) should be awarded if criteria in any mark band are fully or nearly fully met. The lower marks (62, 33, etc.) should be awarded to scripts that are above the highest standard for the category below but fail to meet all the criteria for the selected mark band. The middle marks (45, 55, 65, 75) can also be used when marking between 40 and 80%.
100 (93)
An outstanding essay, as good as can be reasonably expected. Must show excellent understanding of the topic and synthesis of material from a range of relevant sources. Presentation and structure excellent with effective use of diagrams and formulas (where appropriate). Reference material cited and listed appropriately.
88 (83)
An excellent answer, demonstrates full understanding of the topic. Good use of material from a wide range of relevant sources. Extremely well written and structured with effective use of diagrams and formulas (where appropriate). Reference material cited and listed appropriately.
78 (75) (72)
A very good essay that includes all the major points required to address the topic, demonstrates a thorough understanding of the topic. Good use of material from several sources. Presentation and structure good with good use of diagrams and formulas (where appropriate). Reference material cited and listed appropriately.
68 (65) (62)
A good essay that includes most of the major points required to address the topic, shows a good understanding of the subject area. Good use of material from several sources. Presentation and structure generally good with good use of diagrams and formulas (where appropriate). Reference material cited and listed appropriately.
58 (55) (52)
A satisfactory essay that includes the basic information required to address the topic, shows understanding of the topic. Material may be from a limited range of sources or too reliant on the slides provided in the module. Insufficient thought given to structure, some use of diagrams and formulas (where appropriate). Some errors in citing and listing reference material.
48 (45) (42)
Essay incomplete with serious omissions, some sound knowledge and evidence that the topic has, at least partly, been understood. Material may be from a limited range of sources or too reliant on the slides provided in the module. Poorly structured with poor use of diagrams and images. Errors in citing and listing reference material.
38 (33)
Unsatisfactory essay with major omissions and errors; lacks evidence of understanding. Material from a limited range of sources or too reliant on the slides provided in the module but some material relevant to the topic. Poorly structured with poor use of diagrams and formulas. Errors in citing and listing reference material.
28 (23)
Poor essay but contains some relevant points. Material from a limited range of sources or too reliant on the slides provided in the module. Poorly structured, little use of appropriate images or diagrams. Errors in citing and listing reference material.
18 (13)
Little of value, one major or a small number of minor points which may be just relevant. Fails to address the question.
8 (3)
Virtually nothing of value, maybe one or two very minor points, phrases or words that are barely relevant. No evidence of understanding the question.
0
Answer contains nothing relevant to the question.
Feedback to Students:
Both Summative and Formative feedback is given to encourage students to reflect on their learning that feed forward into following assessment tasks. The preparation for all assessment tasks will be supported by formative feedback within the tutorials/seminars. Written feedback is provided as appropriate. Please be aware to use the browser and not the Canvas App as you may not be able to view all comments.
Plagiarism:
It is your responsibility to ensure that you understand correct referencing practices. You are expected to use appropriate references and keep carefully detailed notes of all your information sources, including any material downloaded from the Internet. It is your responsibility to ensure that you are not vulnerable to any alleged breaches of the assessment regulations. More information is available at https://intranet.birmingh am.ac.uk/as/studentservices/conduct/misconduct/plagiarism/index.aspx.
Assignment Instructions
Submit your assignment through Canvas.
All papers mentioned in the questions are uploaded on the relevant topic pages in Canvas. Wider reading and referencing other literature is welcome but only if strictly relevant for the topic. This means that if you provide support to your argument with more literature this will be evaluated positively as long as it is relevant for the discussion.
Please type your answer. You should produce your own equations, tables and diagrams where relevant, either by hand (and uploaded/scanned) or digitally. Figures copied directly from the slides or online sources will receive lower marks. The exception is plots of data taken from published articles, which can be included directly as long as they are appropriately referenced.
Refer to the marking criteria for further guidance and write to me (a.digirolamo@bham.ac.uk) if anything is unclear.
Assignment Instructions
Submit your assignment through Canvas.
All papers mentioned in the questions are uploaded on the relevant topic pages in Canvas. Wider reading and referencing other literature is welcome but only if strictly relevant for the topic. This means that if you provide support to your argument with more literature this will be evaluated positively as long as it is relevant for the discussion.
Please type your answer. You should produce your own equations, tables and diagrams where relevant, either by hand (and uploaded/scanned) or digitally. Figures copied directly from the slides or online sources will receive lower marks. The exception is plots of data taken from published articles, which can be included directly as long as they are appropriately referenced.
Refer to the marking criteria for further guidance and write to me (a.digirolamo@bham.ac.uk) if anything is unclear.

Calculate the price of your order

550 words
We'll send you the first draft for approval by September 11, 2018 at 10:52 AM
Total price:
$26
The price is based on these factors:
Academic level
Number of pages
Urgency
Basic features
  • Free title page and bibliography
  • Unlimited revisions
  • Plagiarism-free guarantee
  • Money-back guarantee
  • 24/7 support
On-demand options
  • Writer’s samples
  • Part-by-part delivery
  • Overnight delivery
  • Copies of used sources
  • Expert Proofreading
Paper format
  • 275 words per page
  • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)

Our guarantees

Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.

Money-back guarantee

You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.

Read more

Zero-plagiarism guarantee

Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.

Read more

Free-revision policy

Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.

Read more

Privacy policy

Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.

Read more

Fair-cooperation guarantee

By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.

Read more