IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolet/v121y2013i1p124-127.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How economic rewards affect cooperation reconsidered

Author

Listed:
  • Kagel, John H.
  • Schley, Dan R.

Abstract

Recent studies suggest that payoffs in cents, compared to dollars, produce less defection in a repeated prisoner’s dilemma game. We are unable to replicate these findings with conventional economic procedures or in a direct replication.

Suggested Citation

  • Kagel, John H. & Schley, Dan R., 2013. "How economic rewards affect cooperation reconsidered," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 121(1), pages 124-127.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:121:y:2013:i:1:p:124-127
    DOI: 10.1016/j.econlet.2013.07.012
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165176513003364
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.econlet.2013.07.012?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Smith, Vernon L & Walker, James M, 1993. "Rewards, Experience and Decision Costs in First Price Auctions," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 31(2), pages 237-245, April.
    2. Eldar Shafir & Peter Diamond & Amos Tversky, 1997. "Money Illusion," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(2), pages 341-374.
    3. Pedro Dal Bo & Guillaume R. Frochette, 2011. "The Evolution of Cooperation in Infinitely Repeated Games: Experimental Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(1), pages 411-429, February.
    4. Mario Pandelaere & Barbara Briers & Christophe Lembregts, 2011. "How to Make a 29% Increase Look Bigger: The Unit Effect in Option Comparisons," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 38(2), pages 308-322.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Johnsen, Åshild A. & Kvaløy, Ola, 2021. "Conspiracy against the public - An experiment on collusion11“People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the publ," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    2. Johnsen, Åshild Auglænd, 2017. "Conspiracy against the public - an experiment on collusion," Working Paper Series 03-2017, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, School of Economics and Business.
    3. Maximilian Andres, 2023. "Communication in the Infinitely Repeated Prisoner's Dilemma: Theory and Experiments," Papers 2304.12297, arXiv.org.
    4. Guillaume R. Fréchette & Sevgi Yuksel, 2017. "Infinitely repeated games in the laboratory: four perspectives on discounting and random termination," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 20(2), pages 279-308, June.
    5. Heller, Yuval & Tubul, Itay, 2023. "Strategies in the repeated prisoner’s dilemma: A cluster analysis," MPRA Paper 117444, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lembregts, Christophe & Pandelaere, Mario, 2014. ""A 20% income increase for everyone?": The effect of relative increases in income on perceived income inequality," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 37-47.
    2. Goeree, Jacob K. & Holt, Charles A. & Palfrey, Thomas R., 2002. "Quantal Response Equilibrium and Overbidding in Private-Value Auctions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 104(1), pages 247-272, May.
    3. Matthew Fisher & Milica Mormann, 2022. "The Off by 100% Bias: The Effects of Percentage Changes Greater than 100% on Magnitude Judgments and Consumer Choice [Numerosity and Consumer Behavior]," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 49(4), pages 561-573.
    4. repec:cup:judgdm:v:15:y:2020:i:6:p:972-988 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Johnsen, Åshild A. & Kvaløy, Ola, 2021. "Conspiracy against the public - An experiment on collusion11“People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the publ," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    6. Wright, Julian, 2013. "Punishment strategies in repeated games: Evidence from experimental markets," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 91-102.
    7. David Genesove & Christopher Mayer, 2001. "Loss Aversion and Seller Behavior: Evidence from the Housing Market," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 116(4), pages 1233-1260.
    8. Tyszka, Tadeusz & Przybyszewski, Krzysztof, 2006. "Cognitive and emotional factors affecting currency perception," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 518-530, August.
    9. Mario Herberz & Tobias Brosch & Ulf J. J. Hahnel, 2020. "Kilo what? Default units increase value sensitivity in joint evaluations of energy efficiency," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(6), pages 972-988, November.
    10. Ashton, John K. & Hudson, Robert S., 2008. "Interest rate clustering in UK financial services markets," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 1393-1403, July.
    11. Smith, Jennifer C., 2002. "Pay Cuts And Morale : A Test Of Downward Nominal Rigidity," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 649, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    12. Deckers Thomas & Falk Armin & Schildberg-Hörisch Hannah, 2016. "Nominal or Real? The Impact of Regional Price Levels on Satisfaction with Life," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 16(3), pages 1337-1358, September.
    13. Shiller, Robert J., 1999. "Social security and institutions for intergenerational, intragenerational, and international risk-sharing," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 165-204, June.
    14. Bigoni, Maria & Camera, Gabriele & Casari, Marco, 2020. "Money is more than memory," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 99-115.
    15. Ernst Fehr & Jean-Robert Tyran, 1999. "Does Money Illusion Matter? An Experimental Approach," CESifo Working Paper Series 184, CESifo.
    16. John Duffy, 1998. "Monetary theory in the laboratory," Review, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, issue Sep, pages 9-26.
    17. Benoît, Jean-Pierre & Galbiati, Roberto & Henry, Emeric, 2017. "Investing to cooperate: Theory and experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 1-17.
    18. Brown, William O. & Huang, Dayong & Wang, Fang, 2016. "Inflation illusion and stock returns," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 14-24.
    19. Robert J. Shiller, 2006. "Designing Indexed Units of Account," Chapters, in: Lawrence R. Klein (ed.), Long-run Growth and Short-run Stabilization, chapter 11, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    20. Andrew E. Clark & Nicolai Kristensen & Niels Westergård‐Nielsen, 2009. "Job Satisfaction and Co‐worker Wages: Status or Signal?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 119(536), pages 430-447, March.
    21. Wilson, Alistair J. & Wu, Hong, 2017. "At-will relationships: How an option to walk away affects cooperation and efficiency," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 487-507.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Numeric effects; Repeated prisoner dilemma games; Experiments;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • B4 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology
    • C7 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory
    • C9 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:121:y:2013:i:1:p:124-127. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolet .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.