IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jocore/v34y1990i3p401-425.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Provision of Step-Level Public Goods

Author

Listed:
  • Ido Erev

    (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill)

  • Amnon Rapoport

    (University of Arizona)

Abstract

Groups of five players participated in a social dilemma game in which each player receives a monetary endowment and then chooses whether to contribute it to a monetary public good. The good is provided to all group members if at least three contributions are made; it is not provided, otherwise. Experiment 1 showed that the simultaneous protocol of play—where decisions are made privately and anonymously—is significantly less effective in solving the dilemma than the sequential protocol—where decisions are made sequentially with complete information about previous decisions in the sequence. Experiment 2 replicated this finding and, in addition, showed that the sequential protocol with only information about previous noncooperative choices is significantly more effective in solving the dilemma than the sequential protocol with only information about previous cooperative choices.

Suggested Citation

  • Ido Erev & Amnon Rapoport, 1990. "Provision of Step-Level Public Goods," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 34(3), pages 401-425, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jocore:v:34:y:1990:i:3:p:401-425
    DOI: 10.1177/0022002790034003002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0022002790034003002
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0022002790034003002?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rapoport, Amnon, 1985. "Provision of Public Goods and the MCS Experimental Paradigm," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 79(1), pages 148-155, March.
    2. Hampton, Jean, 1987. "Free-Rider Problems in the Production of Collective Goods," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(2), pages 245-273, October.
    3. Harrison, Glenn W & Hirshleifer, Jack, 1989. "An Experimental Evaluation of Weakest Link/Best Shot Models of Public Goods," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 97(1), pages 201-225, February.
    4. van de Kragt, Alphons J. C. & Orbell, John M. & Dawes, Robyn M., 1983. "The Minimal Contributing Set as a Solution to Public Goods Problems," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 77(1), pages 112-122, March.
    5. Dawes, Robyn M. & Orbell, John M. & Simmons, Randy T. & Van De Kragt, Alphons J. C., 1986. "Organizing Groups for Collective Action," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 80(4), pages 1171-1185, December.
    6. Rapoport, Amnon & Eshed-Levy, Dalit, 1989. "Provision of step-level public goods: Effects of greed and fear of being gypped," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 325-344, December.
    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. Ramzi Suleiman, 1997. "Provision Of Step-Level Public Goods Under Uncertainty," Rationality and Society, , vol. 9(2), pages 163-187, May.
    2. Edward Cartwright & Anna Stepanova, 2017. "Efficiency in a forced contribution threshold public good game," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 46(4), pages 1163-1191, November.
    3. Ledyard, John O., "undated". "Public Goods: A Survey of Experimental Research," Working Papers 861, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
    4. Ramzi Suleiman & David V. Budescu & Amnon Rapoport, 2001. "Provision of Step-Level Public Goods with Uncertain Provision Threshold and Continuous Contribution," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 253-274, May.
    5. Goren, Harel & Kurzban, Robert & Rapoport, Amnon, 2003. "Social loafing vs. social enhancement: Public goods provisioning in real-time with irrevocable commitments," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 90(2), pages 277-290, March.
    6. David M. McEvoy & James J. Murphy & John M. Spraggon & John K. Stranlund, 2011. "The problem of maintaining compliance within stable coalitions: experimental evidence," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 63(3), pages 475-498, July.
    7. Craig D. Parks & Lorne G. Hulbert, 1995. "High And Low Trusters' Responses To Fear in a Payoff Matrix," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 39(4), pages 718-730, December.
    8. Marks, Melanie & Croson, Rachel, 1998. "Alternative rebate rules in the provision of a threshold public good: An experimental investigation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 195-220, February.
    9. Rose, Steven K. & Clark, Jeremy & Poe, Gregory L. & Rondeau, Daniel & Schulze, William D., 2002. "The private provision of public goods: tests of a provision point mechanism for funding green power programs," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(1-2), pages 131-155, February.
    10. Malte Müller & Jens Rommel & Christian Kimmich, 2018. "Farmers’ Adoption of Irrigation Technologies: Experimental Evidence from a Coordination Game with Positive Network Externalities in India," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 19(2), pages 119-139, May.
    11. Federica Alberti & Edward J. Cartwright, 2016. "Full agreement and the provision of threshold public goods," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 166(1), pages 205-233, January.
    12. Ramzi Suleiman, 2022. "Economic Harmony—A Rational Theory of Fairness and Cooperation in Strategic Interactions," Games, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-21, April.
    13. Cadsby, Charles Bram & Maynes, Elizabeth, 1999. "Voluntary provision of threshold public goods with continuous contributions: experimental evidence," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 53-73, January.
    14. Alphons Kragt & Robyn Dawes & John Orbell, 1988. "Are people who cooperate ‘rational altruists’?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 56(3), pages 233-247, March.
    15. Jörg Spiller & Friedel Bolle, 2017. "Experimental investigations of coordination games: high success rates, invariant behavior, and surprising dynamics," Discussion Paper Series RECAP15 28, RECAP15, European University Viadrina, Frankfurt (Oder).
    16. Murnighan, J. Keith & Wang, Long, 2016. "The social world as an experimental game," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 80-94.
    17. Spiller, Jörg & Bolle, Friedel, 2017. "Experimental investigations of binary threshold public good games," Discussion Papers 393, European University Viadrina Frankfurt (Oder), Department of Business Administration and Economics.
    18. Cardella, Eric & Depew, Briggs, 2018. "Output restriction and the ratchet effect: Evidence from a real-effort work task," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 182-202.
    19. Douadia Bougherara & Laurent Denant-Boèmont & David Masclet, 2007. "Creating vs. maintaining threshold public goods in conservation policies," Working Papers hal-01939965, HAL.
    20. Cartwright, Edward & Stepanova, Anna, 2015. "The consequences of a refund in threshold public good games," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 29-33.

    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:sae:jocore:v:34:y:1990:i:3:p:401-425. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://pss.la.psu.edu/ .

    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.