It depends on what the person's underlying preferences are and what their beliefs are about what their counterpart's preferences are. Remember that "rationality" is basically just a statement about someone behaving consistently with a particular set of goals. Rationality and self-interest are not the same thing. A person could be rational and self-interested or self-regarding, or they could be rational and other-regarding in some way. But even if one person is rational and self-regarding, that does not mean they have a belief that the other player is self-regarding. If a rational and self-regarding player offered zero, then they would also not be offering an incentive for their rational and self-regarding partner to accept the offer as they would be indifferent between zero from rejecting and zero from accepting; so even with self-regarding players, one would expect an offer of the lowest feasible amount greater than zero.

Happy to help! Good luck with your studies.

I'm going to respond to your question with a question and say if you substitute in two points (with corresponding x and y values) what happens to the value of the MRS? If you have one point with a large y and small x on a given indifference curve and another with small y and large x on the same indifference curve what is the value of the MRS at the two points? What does that suggest is true of points along the indifference curve?

I did that and it showed that MRS declined at different x and y points along the indifference curve. It made sense. Thank you very much. Just wanted to confirm.

Been sharing your videos with my mates

@@missgrenade653 Glad to help! And I hope you and they find them helpful. Just wish I had more time to make more of them! In case you missed it, my textbook is also available on my website for free (simondhalliday.com/microeconomics) in case some of the context is missing in the videos.

@@simondhalliday3919 I will check it out. Thank you!

I guess, the pictures is mirrored, as the marriage ring and clock are on the right hand. Only maybe :)

That's exactly what I was thinking! :D

Mirror

Yes, unless the researcher is trying to understand the role of information asymmetry in particular, in general the rules are known to all players of the game in economic experiments. This allows us transparently to identify peoples' responses in a way that is compatible with the incentives involved and to compare the different institutional settings offered by different "rules of the game" in different contexts. For example, the $1 received by the receiver is likely to be subjectively experienced differently if they known the proposer had $2 total, $5 total, $10, $20 and so on. In the first case of receiving $1 of a total of $2 is likely to be perceived as fairer than $1 of $10.

I'll probably deal with that in another video in the future, but there's a general difference between outcomes-based models (such as this one) vs. models that also have to do with the process or intentions of people. A substantial amount of evidence suggests that people don't only care about the amount of money they receive in a game, but whether they are treated with good intentions by other players. See, e.g. this paper on which Fehr was also a co-author: www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0899825607000784

Of course! Share away.

@@simonhalliday7692 thank you!

Grabbed info from two videos: kzbin.info/www/bejne/gmLEpmSArbKGl6M & kzbin.info/www/bejne/j6KWi6VppsZorKc & got parts at local hardware store. - 36" plexiglass (0.22"+ thick) - LED strip lights 36" - 4 x 15" or bigger brackets - 4 x small c clamps - Duct tape - Folding Table - Neon markers I got most of the stuff from Home Depot. Staples had the neon markers. I needed a black sheet for my wall that I got at Target. I record with an older Sony RX100 camera on a tripod and import the videos onto my laptop.