Economic Classroom Experiments/Pit Market
Overview
editLevel
editAny level (high school on up)
Prerequisite knowledge
editNone (ability to count)
Suitable modules
editMicroeconomics, industrial organization and public economics at any level.
Intended learning outcomes
edit The primary benefit is to teach students the relevance and robustness of the competitiveequilibrium solution.
 Extensions allow for the demonstration of price floors and ceilings and the taxliabilityside equivalence theorem.
 An introduction to inducedvalue methods used in other market and auction experiments.
HandRun Version
editThe pit market is designed to be run by hand. For a computerized experiment that demonstrates the competitive solution, a doubleauction market is the nearest equivalent.
Procedures
editPrior to the experiment, prepare two sets of cards; one from which buyers' valuations are drawn and the other from which sellers' costs are drawn. You can use playing cards or prepare your own with any numbers you like on them. Make sure you choose the cards ahead of time so that the resultant supply and demand curves overlap where all or almost of the units may be traded at a profit at the competitive price.
When the students arrive, divide them into two groups of buyers and sellers. Ensure that there are at least four sellers and four buyers for convergence to the competitive outcome. The groups of buyers and sellers need not be of equal size. Give each student a record sheet (included along with instructions for participants in the downloadable file (link below)) to track their progress. Distribute randomly one or more cards to each of the buyers and sellers from their respective deck of cards. After everyone has received one or more cards, allow students to enter the pit (a large open space in the classroom) where they freely negotiate with one another. When a buyer and a seller agree upon a price, they report their negotiated price to one of the experimenters and turn in their cards face down. To speed up convergence to the competitive equilibrium, recruit a helper from among the students to write the negotiated price on the board for all to see. Have a timekeeper announce the time remaining at regular intervals. At the end of the round, collect all unused cards, shuffle and redistribute randomly for the next round.
Discussion of Results
editIn an introductory microeconomics course, the pitmarket experiment can be conducted prior to teaching supply and demand and the competitive equilibrium to motivate the relevance of these topics. I prefer to conduct it immediately following the lecture on these topics. Begin by showing students the results from their experiment in a transactions graph (software downloadable from the link below).
Also, show them the distributions of buyers' valuations and sellers' costs and ask them to explain why prices converged to the particular observed levels (27 to 28 in the example above). Surprisingly, in a principles course, you'll rarely, if ever, hear the correct answer. Instead, students will claim that the observed prices "are the average of all of the cards," or "at these prices buyers and sellers earn the same". Use asymmetric supply and demand curves (like those in the figure below upon which the transaction prices above are based) in order to reject these explanations and focus on the profit maximization motive and the forces of supply and demand.
Review the textbook assumptions underlying the competitiveequilibrium model and discuss why some of these assumptions are unnecessary for convergence (e.g., full information and the inability to collude or form cartels) and others are imprecise (e.g., "large" numbers of buyers and sellers). Market efficiency, alternative market institutions and the role of displaying transaction prices on the board (or information more generally) are additional topics for class discussion.
Extensions
editExpect prices and quantities to converge to the competitive equilibrium within three or four rounds. If you have additional time, you might try imposing a price floor above the competitive price or a price ceiling below it. More interestingly, announce an nunit tax on the buyers imposed on each unit traded and listen to them groan. The following period replace the tax on the buyers with an (equivalent) nunit tax on the sellers. Afterwards, you can display to students the outcomes from these two tax periods; namely, the net prices paid and received and the quantity traded are equivalent in the two tax treatments and that the incidence of the tax depends solely on the relative elasticities of supply and demand. See Ruffle (2005) for a further discussion of experimental tests of tax incidence equivalence and the analogous theorem for subsidies.
Further Reading
editBergstrom, Theodore C. and John H. Miller. "Experiments with Economic Principles", McGraw Hill: New York, 2nd ed. 2000.
Holt, Charles A. (1996) "Classroom Games: Trading in the Pit," Journal of Economic Perspectives, 10:1, 193203.
Ruffle, Bradley J. (2003) "Competitive Equilibrium and Classroom Pit Markets," Journal of Economic Education, 34:2, 123137.
Ruffle, Bradley J. (2005) "Tax and subsidy incidence equivalence theories: experimental evidence from competitive markets," Journal of Public Economics, 89, 15191542.
Downloads
editExternal links
edit
Topics in Economic Classroom Experiments  
Auctions 

Markets 

Public Economics 

Industrial Organization 

Macroeconomics and Finance 

Game Theory 

Individual Decisions 
