Cooper, D., & Kagel, J. (2006). The role of context and team play in cross-game learning (Mimeo).
Coppinger, V., Smith, V., & Titus, J. (1980). Incentives and behavior in English, Dutch, and sealed-bid auctions. Economic Inquiry, 18, 1–22.
Cox, J., Roberson, B., & Smith, V. (1982). Theory and behavior of single object auctions. In V. L. Smith (Ed.), Research in experimental economics (Vol. 2, pp. 1–43). Greenwich: JAI Press.
Garratt, R., Walker, M., & Wooders, J. (2004). Behavior in second-price auctions by highly experienced eBay buyers and sellers (UCSB Working Paper 04-04).
Güth, W., & Ivanova-Stenzel, R. (2003). Asymmetric auctions experiments with(out) commonly known beliefs. Economics Letters, 80, 195–199.
Güth, W., Ivanova-Stenzel, R., & Wolfstetter, E. (2003). Learning to bid—an experimental study of bid function adjustments in auctions and fair division games. Economic Journal, 113, 477–494.
Güth, W., Ivanova-Stenzel, R., & Wolfstetter, E. (2005). Bidding behavior in asymmetric auctions: an experimental study. European Economic Review, 49, 1891–1913.
Harstad, R. (2000). Dominant strategy adoption, efficiency and bidders’ experience with pricing rules. Experimental Economics, 3, 261–280.
Kagel, J., & Levin, D. (1993). Independent private value auctions: bidder behavior in first-, second- and third price auctions with varying numbers of bidders. Economic Journal, 103, 868–879.
Kagel, J., Harstad, R., & Levin, D. (1987). Information impact and allocation rules in auctions with affiliated private values: a laboratory study. Econometrica, 55, 1275–1304.
Kirchkamp, O., & Reiss, P. (2006). Another explanation for overbidding and another bias for underbidding in first price auctions (CRIEFF Discussion Paper 0606).
Mullin, C., & Reiley, D. (2006). Recombinant estimation for normal-form games, with applications to auctions and bargaining. Games and Economic Behavior, 54, 159–182.
Roth, A., & Ockenfels, A. (2002). Last minute bidding and the rules for ending second-price auctions: evidence from eBay and Amazon auctions on the Internet. The American Economic Review, 92, 1093–1103.