Strategy-Proofness of Stochastic Assignment Mechanisms

André Schmelzer

The Journal of Mechanism and Institution Design, 2018, vol. 3, issue 1, 17-50

Abstract: This paper seeks to identify which algorithm to employ in a situation where goods are distributed to individuals without using money, while treating everyone equally and respecting each individual's preferences. I compare two stochastic assignment mechanisms: Random serial dictatorship (RSD) and top trading cycles with random endowments (TTC). In standard theory, both algorithms are strategy-proof and yield the optimal result. In the experiment, RSD outperforms TTC. This can be attributed to a more dominant strategy play under RSD. Generally, subjects with extremely high and low levels of contingent reasoning play their dominant strategies. These results suggest that one optimal algorithm may outperform another one if individuals are boundedly rational.

Keywords: Market design; mechanism design; randomization. (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: C78 C92 D47 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.mechanism-design.org/arch/v003-1/p_02.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
Working Paper: Strategy-proofness of stochastic assignment mechanisms (2017)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:jmi:articl:jmi-v3i1a2

DOI: 10.22574/jmid.2018.12.002

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in The Journal of Mechanism and Institution Design from Society for the Promotion of Mechanism and Institution Design, University of York Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Paul Schweinzer ().