Experimental Proof for the Motivational Importance of Reciprocity
AbstractVideo taped group decision experiments on a two-person investment game were used to elicit the motivational structure of subjects' behavior. A majority of investors trusted (invested) and a majority of receivers reciprocated (returned). Cognition and decision were focused on extremes: total or no investment and equitable or no return. Subjects exhibited motivational heterogeneity in both roles, but both materialism and reciprocity proved stronger than altruism. The qualitative model of motivational attractors is introduced to explain observations. The model is also applied to the ultimatum game and compared to utilitarian, behavioral, and evolutionary approaches to the question of economic motivation.
Download InfoTo our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by University of Bonn, Germany in its series Discussion Paper Serie B with number 386.
Date of creation: Sep 1996
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Bonn Graduate School of Economics, University of Bonn, Adenauerallee 24 - 26, 53113 Bonn, Germany
Fax: +49 228 73 6884
Web page: http://www.bgse.uni-bonn.de
Bargaining; Fairness; Motivation; Reciprocity; Trust;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
- C78 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Bargaining Theory; Matching Theory
- C92 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Group Behavior
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page. reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (BGSE Office).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.