Back to History

Fields Changed

Registration

Field Before After
Trial Status in_development completed
Last Published October 22, 2018 01:00 AM March 18, 2021 11:08 AM
Study Withdrawn No
Intervention Completion Date November 16, 2018
Data Collection Complete Yes
Final Sample Size: Number of Clusters (Unit of Randomization) 98 trading groups (20 Double Auction sessions + 78 Bilateral Bargaining sessions)
Was attrition correlated with treatment status? No
Final Sample Size: Total Number of Observations 316 subjects
Final Sample Size (or Number of Clusters) by Treatment Arms 160 participants in the Double Auction treatment (80 in Low Anchor group and 80 in High Anchor Group) 156 participants in the Bilateral Bargaining treatment (78 in Low Anchor group and 78 in High Anchor Group) * Given our null result of anchoring, the control treatment was not run.
Public Data URL https://github.com/KonstantinosIoannidis/Anchoring/tree/master/Data
Is there a restricted access data set available on request? No
Program Files Yes
Program Files URL https://github.com/KonstantinosIoannidis/Anchoring/tree/master/Stata
Data Collection Completion Date November 16, 2018
Is data available for public use? Yes
Back to top

Papers

Field Before After
Paper Abstract We test whether markets are needed to mitigate the effects of anchoring on peoples' preferences. We anchor subjects by asking them if they are willing to sell a bottle of wine for a transparently uninformative random price. We elicit subjects' Willingness-To-Accept for the bottle before and after the market. Subjects either participate in a small or a large double auction market. The variance in subjects' Willingness-To-Accept shrinks within trading groups. Our evidence supports the idea that markets have the potential to mitigate a bias. However, the market is not needed: our anchoring manipulation failed in a large sample.
Paper Citation Ioannidis, K., Offerman, T., & Sloof, R. (2020). On the effect of anchoring on valuations when the anchor is transparently uninformative. Journal of the Economic Science Association, 6(1), 77-94.
Paper URL https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40881-020-00094-1
Back to top