The authors study two-player, pie-splitting games in which one player knows the pie and the other knows only its probability distribution. The authors compare treatments in which incentive-efficient strikes (disagreements) are possible with alternatives in which efficiency forbids strikes. They find that incentive-efficiency is very helpful in explaining when strikes occur. There is also evidence of substantial heterogeneity in the subjects' altruism and in their risk preferences. This means that the common-knowledge assumptions of game theory cannot be controlled in experiments; but in the authors' experiments the main theoretical conclusions seem robust to violations of these assumptions. Copyright 1991 by American Economic Association.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 94 citations exist upstream.