Is there any proof that you shouldn’t incentivize threats? Consider two situations:
Someone tells you “Give me $5 or I’ll destroy your $10”.
You are the first player in the Ultimatum Game. The second player tells you “Offer me $5 or I’ll reject your offer”.
Should you ignore the first threat but give in to the second one (instead of offering $0)? If yes, what is the difference between these cases?
The only difference I see is that in Ultimatum Game you get $10 from the third person (experimenter) before the “threat”. But is this important for the decision?
Is there any proof that you shouldn’t incentivize threats? Consider two situations:
Someone tells you “Give me $5 or I’ll destroy your $10”.
You are the first player in the Ultimatum Game. The second player tells you “Offer me $5 or I’ll reject your offer”.
Should you ignore the first threat but give in to the second one (instead of offering $0)? If yes, what is the difference between these cases?
The only difference I see is that in Ultimatum Game you get $10 from the third person (experimenter) before the “threat”. But is this important for the decision?