[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/econjl/v130y2020i626p356-392..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Iterative Versus Standard Deferred Acceptance: Experimental Evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Inácio Bó
  • Rustamdjan Hakimov
Abstract
We test experimentally the Gale–Shapley Deferred Acceptance mechanism versus two versions of the Iterative Deferred Acceptance Mechanism, in which students make applications one at a time. A significantly higher proportion of stable outcomes is reached under Iterative Deferred Acceptance Mechanism than under Deferred Acceptance. The difference can be explained by a higher proportion of subjects following an equilibrium truthful strategy under iterative mechanisms than the dominant strategy of truthful reporting under Deferred Acceptance. We associate the benefits of iterative mechanisms with the feedback on the outcome of the previous application that they provide to students between steps.

Suggested Citation

  • Inácio Bó & Rustamdjan Hakimov, 2020. "Iterative Versus Standard Deferred Acceptance: Experimental Evidence," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 130(626), pages 356-392.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:econjl:v:130:y:2020:i:626:p:356-392.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/ej/uez036
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C78 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Bargaining Theory; Matching Theory
    • C92 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Group Behavior
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • D78 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Positive Analysis of Policy Formulation and Implementation
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:econjl:v:130:y:2020:i:626:p:356-392.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/resssea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.