What is he best known for?
The fields of study he is best known for:
- Microeconomics
- Social psychology
- Game theory
Roman M. Sheremeta mainly investigates Microeconomics, Rent-seeking, Competition, Resource and Public good.
His research integrates issues of Contest design and Risk aversion in his study of Microeconomics.
His studies deal with areas such as Endowment, Group decision-making and Lottery as well as Rent-seeking.
His Public good research is multidisciplinary, incorporating elements of Shame and Free riding.
His studies in Complete information integrate themes in fields like Construct, Collusion, Common value auction and Externality.
His study in Common value auction is interdisciplinary in nature, drawing from both Dynamism, Public economics, Welfare and Conflict avoidance.
His most cited work include:
- A survey of experimental research on contests, all-pay auctions and tournaments (341 citations)
- A survey of experimental research on contests, all-pay auctions and tournaments (341 citations)
- Experimental Comparison of Multi-Stage and One-Stage Contests (195 citations)
What are the main themes of his work throughout his whole career to date?
Roman M. Sheremeta mainly focuses on Microeconomics, Social psychology, Incentive, Rent-seeking and Competition.
His Microeconomics study integrates concerns from other disciplines, such as Contest design and Risk aversion.
His Social psychology study which covers Public good that intersects with Social dilemma.
His Incentive research includes themes of Comparative statics and Deception.
His Rent-seeking study combines topics in areas such as Test, Mathematical economics, Stochastic game and Lottery.
His Competition research is multidisciplinary, relying on both Public economics, Industrial organization, Coordination game and Bounded rationality.
He most often published in these fields:
- Microeconomics (55.52%)
- Social psychology (26.30%)
- Incentive (25.97%)
What were the highlights of his more recent work (between 2016-2021)?
- Microeconomics (55.52%)
- Incentive (25.97%)
- Laboratory experiment (17.86%)
In recent papers he was focusing on the following fields of study:
Microeconomics, Incentive, Laboratory experiment, Positive economics and Battle are his primary areas of study.
All of his Microeconomics and Nash equilibrium, Collusion, Free riding, Comparative statics and Competition investigations are sub-components of the entire Microeconomics study.
His research in Nash equilibrium intersects with topics in Rent-seeking, Status quo and Risk aversion.
His work carried out in the field of Competition brings together such families of science as Communication in small groups and Coordination game.
His Incentive research incorporates themes from Advertising, Sample and Social psychology.
His Positive economics study combines topics from a wide range of disciplines, such as Variety, Empirical research, All-pay auction and Economic model.
Between 2016 and 2021, his most popular works were:
- BEHAVIOR IN GROUP CONTESTS: A REVIEW OF EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH (33 citations)
- BEHAVIOR IN GROUP CONTESTS: A REVIEW OF EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH (33 citations)
- War and Conflict in Economics: Theories, Applications, and Recent Trends (22 citations)
In his most recent research, the most cited papers focused on:
- Microeconomics
- Social psychology
- Game theory
Roman M. Sheremeta mostly deals with Microeconomics, Incentive, Competition, Battle and Risk aversion.
A large part of his Microeconomics studies is devoted to Coordination game.
The Incentive study combines topics in areas such as Quality, Social psychology and Loss aversion.
In general Social psychology, his work in Shame and Harm is often linked to Field, Prestige and Public relations linking many areas of study.
He has researched Competition in several fields, including Social identity theory, Altruism, Bounded rationality, Comparative statics and Industrial organization.
His Risk aversion study incorporates themes from Rent-seeking and Nash equilibrium.
This overview was generated by a machine learning system which analysed the scientist’s
body of work. If you have any feedback, you can
contact us
here.
