Appendix to “ The Role of Context and Team Play in Cross - Game Learning ”

نویسنده

  • John H. Kagel
چکیده

Context * Crossover Cycle 1 -.564 (.242) -.564 (.275) -.938 (.451) -1.007 (.647) Abstract Context * Crossover Cycle 2 -.385 (.232) -.385 (.395) -.620 (.355) -.687 (.588)Context * Crossover Cycle 2 -.385 (.232) -.385 (.395) -.620 (.355) -.687 (.588) Abstract Context * Crossover Cycle 3 .152 (.308) .152 (.367) .207 (.463) .068 (.639)Context * Crossover Cycle 3 .152 (.308) .152 (.367) .207 (.463) .068 (.639) Meaningful Context * Crossover Cycle 1 .727 (.244) .727 (.194) 1.127 (.394) 1.338 (.659) Meaningful Context * Crossover Cycle 2 1.214 (.253) 1.214 (.412) 2.294 (.406) 2.454 (.658) Meaningful Context * Crossover Cycle 3 .467 (.318) .467 (.388) .845 (.466) .845 (.641) 2x2 * Crossover Cycle 1 .698 (.232) .698 (.155) 1.482 (.407) 1.425 (.629) 2x2 * Crossover Cycle 2 .444 (.287) .444 (.287) 1.133 (.478) 1.031 (.648) 2x2 * Crossover Cycle 3 1.322 (.336) 1.322 (.279) 2.116 (.556) 1.925 (.671) Log Likelihood -1414.62 -1414.62 -1053.68 -1046.41 * statistically significant at the 10% level ** statistically significant at the 5% level *** statistically significant at the 1% level Note: Parameter estimates are identical in Models 1 and 2, as clustering only affects the size of the standard errors. Table A.4 Experiment 1: Comparing Outcomes Against Within Treatment Controls (With Entry Rate Controls and Alternative Controls for Individual and Session Effects) Variable Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Individual and Session Effects Clustering Player Level Clustering Session Level Random Effects Player Level Nested Random Effects (Player/Session) # Clusters 419 32 419 419/32 Abstract Context * Crossover Cycle 1 -700 (.277) -700 (.288) -1.078 (.499) -1.030 (.552)Context * Crossover Cycle 1 -700 (.277) -700 (.288) -1.078 (.499) -1.030 (.552) Abstract Context * Crossover Cycle 2 -.613 (.226) -.613 (.310) -.911 (.405) -.891 (.471)Context * Crossover Cycle 2 -.613 (.226) -.613 (.310) -.911 (.405) -.891 (.471) Abstract Context * Crossover Cycle 3 .296 (.307) .296 (.326) .162 (.431) .067 (.490)Context * Crossover Cycle 3 .296 (.307) .296 (.326) .162 (.431) .067 (.490) Meaningful Context * Crossover Cycle 1 .333 (.258) .333 (.311) .547 (.386) .864 (.583) Meaningful Context * Crossover Cycle 2 .800 (.260) .800 (.319) 1.690 (.388) 1.982 (.587) Meaningful Context * Crossover Cycle 3 .691 (.312) .691 (.301) .979 (.418) .934 (.548) 2x2 * Crossover Cycle 1 .385 (.242) .385 (.192) 1.041 (.528) 1.000 (.550) 2x2 * Crossover Cycle 2 .114 (.293) .114 (.289) .630 (.563) .555 (.576) 2x2 * Crossover Cycle 3 1.016 (.341) 1.016 (.304) 1.531 (.530) 1.406 (.600) Entry Rate Differential 1.139 *** (.204) 1.139 (.243) 1.444 (.274) 1.302 (.298) Log Likelihood -1364.20 -1364.20 -1039.52 -1037.18 * statistically significant at the 10% level ** statistically significant at the 5% level *** statistically significant at the 1% level Note: Parameter estimates are identical in Models 1 and 2, as clustering only affects the size of the standard errors. Table A.5 Experiment 2: Crossover from Quantity to Price Game (Alternative Controls for Individual and Session Effects) Variable Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Individual and Session Effects Clustering Player Level Clustering Session Level Random Effects Player Level Nested Random Effects (Player/Session) # Clusters 275 21 275 275/21 Constant -.015 (.193) -.015 (.142) -.552 (.283) -.166 (.301) Cycles 2 – 4 .361 ** (.163) .361 (.296) .781 (.325) .841 (.359) Cycles 3 – 4 .053 (.168) .053 (.186) .118 (.332) .114 (.347) Cycle 4 .162 (.158) .162 (.310) .669 (.347) .718 (.331) 1 x 1 * Meaningful Context * Crossover Cycles 1 – 4 -.277 (.265) -.277 (.215) -.829 (.401) -.999 (.438) 1 x 1 * Meaningful Context * Crossover Cycles 2 – 4 -.346 (.221) -.346 (.303) -.547 (.429) -.611 (.453) 1 x 1 * Meaningful Context * Crossover Cycles 3 – 4 .472 (.247) .472 (.256) 1.056 (.449) 1.017 (.469) 1 x 1 * Meaningful Context * Crossover Cycle 4 -.079 (.200) -.079 (.332) -.208 (.470) -.221 (.451) 1 x 1 * Abstract Context * Control Cycles 1 – 4 -.208 (.274) -.208 (.420) -.276 (.490) -.307 (.595 1 x 1 * Abstract Context * Control Cycles 2 – 4 -.254 (.238) -.254 (.326) -.056 (.458) -.143 (.540) 1 x 1 * Abstract Context * Control Cycles 3 – 4 .261 (.231) .261 (.275) .775 (.504) .875 (.523) 1 x 1 * Abstract Context * Control Cycle 4 .071 (.233) .071 (.372) -.200 (.505) -.291 (.489) Log Likelihood -1188.89 -1188.89 -701.62 -696.56 * statistically significant at the 10% level ** statistically significant at the 5% level *** statistically significant at the 1% level Notes: Parameter estimates are identical in Models 1 & 2 – clustering only affects the size of the standard errors. Table A.6 Experiment 2: Crossover from Quantity to Price Game (With Entry Rate Controls and Alternative Controls for Individual and Session Effects) Variable Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Individual and Session Effects Clustering Player Level Clustering Session Level Random Effects Player Level Nested Random Effects (Player/Session) # Clusters 275 21 275 275/21 Constant -1.468 *** (.357) -1.468 (.338) -1.714 (.507) -.944 (.546) Cycles 2 – 4 .825 *** (.182) .825 (.277) 1.126 (.418) 1.091 (.376) Cycles 3 – 4 -.093 (.185) -.093 (.286) -.072 (.463) -.021 (.278) Cycle 4 -.230 (.214) -.230 (.478) .464 (.363) .491 (.315) 1 x 1 * Meaningful Context * Crossover Cycles 1 – 4 -.187 (.279) -.187 (.300) -.546 (.425) -.815 (.474) 1 x 1 * Meaningful Context * Crossover Cycles 2 – 4 -.492 (.223) -.492 (.315) -.642 (.481) -.642 (.453) 1 x 1 * Meaningful Context * Crossover Cycles 3 – 4 .275 (.268) .275 (.314) .846 (.516) .874 (.403) 1 x 1 * Meaningful Context * Crossover Cycle 4 .109 (.230) .109 (.492) -.089 (.436) -.115 (.426) 1 x 1 * Abstract Context * Control Cycles 1 – 4 .035 (.283) .035 (.325) .156 (.507) -.356 (.680) 1 x 1 * Abstract Context * Control Cycles 2 – 4 -.331 (.251) -.331 (.353) -.196 (.586) -.230 (.529) 1 x 1 * Abstract Context * Control Cycles 3 – 4 .062 (.263) .062 (.406) .748 (.626) .780 (.467) 1 x 1 * Abstract Context * Control Cycle 4 .158 (.262) .158 (.484) -.226 (.512) -.283 (.463) Entry Rate Differential 2.233 *** (.438) 2.233 (.489) 1.606 (.516) .146 (.064) Log Likelihood -1119.11 -1119.11 -696.65 -694.26 * statistically significant at the 10% level ** statistically significant at the 5% level *** statistically significant at the 1% level Notes: Parameter estimates are identical in Models 1 & 2 – clustering only affects the size of the standard errors. The data set includes a large number of observations from experienced subject sessions with a crossover between the high and low cost entrant games. Only observations where the low cost entrant game was played are included. These provide a source of additional independent clusters based on experienced play of the low cost entrant game. This data is dummied out of the regressions – in other words the estimates reported above do not reflect this data. None of these parameter estimates are reported above as these are not of direct interest. The base for the regressions are quantity-price crossover sessions with abstract context. Table A.7 Probit Regressions, Crossover from Quantity to Price Game Standard Errors Corrected for Clustering at the Individual Level Dependent Variable: Strategic Choice by MLs Location Pittsburgh Ohio State Variable Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2 Constant -.210 (.160) -.194 (.158) -.015 (.194) -.136 (.209)

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

The Role of Context and Team Play in Cross-Game Learning

One of the dividing lines between economics and psychology experiments is that economists favor abstract context while psychologists favor meaningful context. We investigate the effects of meaningful versus abstract context on cross-game learning in a signaling game experiment. With individual decision makers (1x1 games) meaningful context promotes positive cross-game learning in moving from a ...

متن کامل

یادگیری تیمی اعضای هیأت علمی؛ یک گام به سمت دانشگاه‌های یادگیرنده

Introduction: Today, team learning is a perfect solution to respond to challenges such as human resource management and competitive challenges and to achieve organizational effectiveness. The aim of research is to study team learning activity of faculty members of health information technology in universities of medical science whole country. Methods: Faculties of Universities of Medical scien...

متن کامل

The Role of Team leadership in Team Performance Mediated by Team learning (Case Study: Teams of Secondary School Teachers in Kurdistan Province)

The purpose of this study was to investigate the role of team leadership on team performance mediated by team learning. The study population was all secondary school teachers in Kurdistan province, from which a sample of 346 teachers was selected by proportional stratified random sampling method based on Cochran's formula. Quantitative research method is correlation studies and covariance-based...

متن کامل

The Role of Team leadership in Team Performance Mediated by Team learning (Case Study: Teams of Secondary School Teachers in Kurdistan Province)

The purpose of this study was to investigate the role of team leadership on team performance mediated by team learning. The study population was all secondary school teachers in Kurdistan province, from which a sample of 346 teachers was selected by proportional stratified random sampling method based on Cochran's formula. Quantitative research method is correlation studies and covariance-based...

متن کامل

An Adaptive Learning Game for Autistic Children using Reinforcement Learning and Fuzzy Logic

This paper, presents an adapted serious game for rating social ability in children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). The required measurements are obtained by challenges of the proposed serious game. The proposed serious game uses reinforcement learning concepts for being adaptive. It is based on fuzzy logic to evaluate the social ability level of the children with ASD. The game adapts itsel...

متن کامل

Exploring the Role of M-Game as a Seat of ESP Reading in the Iranian TVT

To direct m-game to be a possible didactic option for Iranian TVT (Technical Vocational Training) trainees, in this study m-game-mediated (Mobile Game-Mediated)  materials delivery was incorporated into the conventional teaching method in the blended ESP reading skill platform. So, 52 male trainees fromTechnical and Vocational College of Isfahan were selected by convenience sampling. Afterwards...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

عنوان ژورنال:

دوره   شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2007