IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/mhr/jinste/urnsici0932-4569(200703)1631_102fcobla_2.0.tx_2-v.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fairness Crowded Out by Law: An Experimental Study on Withdrawal Rights. Comment

Author

Listed:
  • Werner Güth
  • Georg von Wangenheim

Abstract

no abstract available.

Suggested Citation

  • Werner Güth & Georg von Wangenheim, 2007. "Fairness Crowded Out by Law: An Experimental Study on Withdrawal Rights. Comment," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 163(1), pages 102-105, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:mhr:jinste:urn:sici:0932-4569(200703)163:1_102:fcobla_2.0.tx_2-v
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mohrsiebeck.com/en/article/fairness-crowded-out-by-law-an-experimental-study-on-withdrawal-rights-101628093245607780181982
    Download Restriction: Fulltext access is included for subscribers to the printed version.
    ---><---

    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. Georg Borges & Bernd Irlenbusch, 2007. "Fairness Crowded Out by Law: An Experimental Study on Withdrawal Rights," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 163(1), pages 84-101, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Christoph Engel & Urs Schweizer, 2007. "Editorial Preface," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 163(1), pages 1-4, March.
    2. Christoph Engel & Michael Kurschilgen, 2011. "The Coevolution of Behavior and Normative Expectations. Customary Law in the Lab," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2011_32, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    3. Bettina Rockenbach, 2007. "Fairness Crowded Out by Law: an Experimental Study on Withdrawal Rights. Comment," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 163(1), pages 106-108, March.
    4. Bernd Lahno, 2007. "On the Coevolution of Retribution and Trustworthiness: An (Indirect) Evolutionary and Experimental Analysis. Comment," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 163(1), pages 163-166, March.
    5. Christoph Engel & Urs Schweizer, 2012. "Testing Contracts 29th International Seminar on the New Institutional Economics June 15-18, 2011, Krakow, Poland," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 168(1), pages 1-4, March.
    6. Christoph Engel, 2018. "Empirical Methods for the Law," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 174(1), pages 5-23, March.
    7. Samuel Bowles & Sandra Polania-Reyes, 2012. "Economic Incentives and Social Preferences: Substitutes or Complements?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 50(2), pages 368-425, June.
    8. Samuel Bowles & Sandra Polanía Reyes, 2009. "Economic Incentives and Social Preferences: A Preference-based Lucas Critique of Public Policy," CESifo Working Paper Series 2734, CESifo.
    9. Samuel Bowles & Sandra Polania-Reyes, 2011. "Economic incentives and social preferences: substitutes or complements?," Department of Economics University of Siena 617, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    10. Jing Liu & Anthony Meder & Steven T. Schwartz & Richard A. Young, 2022. "Whither the hidden returns to control: A short research paper," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(8), pages 3361-3369, December.
    11. Ranftl, Simone & Lurger, Brigitta & Brohmer, Hilmar & Athenstaedt, Ursula, 2022. "The Consumer Option Model for Withdrawal Rights in the EU: Analysis of an Alternative Design," American Journal of Trade and Policy, Asian Business Consortium, vol. 9(1), pages 23-42.
    12. J. Luzak, 2014. "To Withdraw Or Not To Withdraw? Evaluation of the Mandatory Right of Withdrawal in Consumer Distance Selling Contracts Taking Into Account Its Behavioural Effects on Consumers," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 91-111, March.
    13. Samuel Bowles & Sandra Polanía Reyes, 2009. "Economic Incentives and Social Preferences: A preference-Based Lucas Critique of Public Policy," UMASS Amherst Economics Working Papers 2009-11, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    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:mhr:jinste:urn:sici:0932-4569(200703)163:1_102:fcobla_2.0.tx_2-v. 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: Thomas Wolpert (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mohrsiebeck.com/jite .

    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.