@article{AndresBruttelFriedrichsen2022, author = {Andres, Maximilian and Bruttel, Lisa and Friedrichsen, Jana}, title = {How communication makes the difference between a cartel and tacit collusion}, series = {European economic review}, volume = {152}, journal = {European economic review}, publisher = {Elsevier}, address = {Amsterdam}, issn = {0014-2921}, doi = {10.1016/j.euroecorev.2022.104331}, pages = {1 -- 18}, year = {2022}, abstract = {This paper sheds new light on the role of communication for cartel formation. Using machine learning to evaluate free-form chat communication among firms in a laboratory experiment, we identify typical communication patterns for both explicit cartel formation and indirect attempts to collude tacitly. We document that firms are less likely to communicate explicitly about price fixing and more likely to use indirect messages when sanctioning institutions are present. This effect of sanctions on communication reinforces the direct cartel-deterring effect of sanctions as collusion is more difficult to reach and sustain without an explicit agreement. Indirect messages have no, or even a negative, effect on prices.}, language = {en} } @article{BruttelZiemann2022, author = {Bruttel, Lisa Verena and Ziemann, Niklas}, title = {How do people discount over spatial distance?}, series = {German economic review}, volume = {24}, journal = {German economic review}, number = {1}, publisher = {De Gruyter}, address = {Berlin}, issn = {1465-6485}, doi = {10.1515/ger-2021-0106}, pages = {33 -- 67}, year = {2022}, abstract = {This paper studies how individuals discount the utility they derive from their provision of goods over spatial distance. In a controlled laboratory experiment in Germany, we elicit preferences for the provision of the same good at different locations. To isolate spatial preferences from any other direct value of the goods being close to the individual, we focus on goods with "existence value." We find that individuals put special weight on the provision of these goods in their immediate vicinity. This "vicinity bias" represents a spatial analogy to the "present bias" in the time dimension.}, language = {en} } @techreport{AndresBruttelFriedrichsen2022, type = {Working Paper}, author = {Andres, Maximilian and Bruttel, Lisa Verena and Friedrichsen, Jana}, title = {How communication makes the difference between a cartel and tacit collusion}, series = {CEPA Discussion Papers}, journal = {CEPA Discussion Papers}, issn = {2628-653X}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-56223}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-562234}, pages = {67}, year = {2022}, abstract = {This paper sheds new light on the role of communication for cartel formation. Using machine learning to evaluate free-form chat communication among firms in a laboratory experiment, we identify typical communication patterns for both explicit cartel formation and indirect attempts to collude tacitly. We document that firms are less likely to communicate explicitly about price fixing and more likely to use indirect messages when sanctioning institutions are present. This effect of sanctions on communication reinforces the direct cartel-deterring effect of sanctions as collusion is more difficult to reach and sustain without an explicit agreement. Indirect messages have no, or even a negative, effect on prices.}, language = {en} }