Score contribution per author:
α: calibrated so average coauthorship-adjusted count equals average raw count
Motivated by recently passed laws in the United States banning inquiries about salary history, this experiment examines the impact of information about a player’s outside option in bargaining. The policy intention is studied by comparing private information to perfect information. Since the laws do not prevent voluntary revelation of salaries, a third treatment examines the impact of adding a truthful revelation choice by the informed party. I find that the signaling value of revelation decisions undermines the benefits of private information. A fourth treatment allows for outside options to be misrepresented. Overall, results suggest that these laws may not work as well as intended.