ArticlePloS one2026
Design, comparison and selection of two competition incentive mechanisms.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
When facing multiple agent teams, principals often implement competitive mechanisms to mitigate moral hazard. These mechanisms can be categorized as either result-oriented or process-oriented, depending on their operational focus. This paper analyzes the optimal incentive contracts offered by principals to agents under these two competitive modes. Furthermore, to mitigate potential conflicts arising from these mechanisms, the matching of agents with varying abilities is also considered. Our analysis reveals that both competitive modes can effectively incentivize agent effort. However, excessive result-oriented competition can be detrimental to the principal's benefits, suggesting that its intensity should be carefully calibrated. Moreover, when forming agent pairs, a "strong-weak" pairing is preferable to a "strong-strong" pairing, which, in turn, is preferable to a "weak-weak" pairing. Finally, this paper discusses the scope of application for each competition-incentive system. These findings provide a foundation for effectively utilizing competitive mechanisms to enhance the principal's returns.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.