Sumo wrestling tournaments typically have 66 wrestlers. Each wrestles 15 matches. A wrestler who has a winning record (eight wins or more) is guaranteed to rise in the official rankings; a wrestler with a losing record falls in the rankings
Suppose the last match of a tournament is between Wrestler A, who has won eight matches so far and Wrestler B, who has won seven. If moral hazard is a serious problem in sumo wrestling, who do you think is more likely to win this match?
Mark Duggan and Steven Levitt find that in these situations, the wrestler who has won seven matches so far is much more likely to win than we would expect. They interpret this is as evidence of moral hazard. Whether or not a wrestler is trying hard to win a match is private information. The two wrestlers in our example could agree to a bribe since the value of winning is much greater for B than for A but the effort they make to win are hidden actions. They find little support for an alternative explanation that B is more likely to win because he is more highly motivated.
See Duggan, M. & Levitt, S. "Winning Isn't Everything: Corruption in Sumo Wrestling," American Economic Review, December 2002
You might also like to view...
Explain what scatter diagrams show and why we use them
What will be an ideal response?
Refer to Scenario 1-2. Using marginal analysis terminology, another economic term for the incremental revenue received from the sale of the last 300 hats is
A) gross earnings. B) sales revenue. C) gross profit. D) marginal revenue.
The Age of the great industrial capitalist was
A. the first quarter of the 19th century. B. the second quarter of the 19th century. C. the third quarter of the 19th century. D. the fourth quarter of the 19th century.
If a non-binding price floor were to be set in the market in the graph shown, it could be set at:
A. $30. B. $16. C. $23. D. All of these would be binding price floors for this market.