Read (2005), in The Journal of Economic Methodology, took our target article in Behavioral and Brain Sciences (Hertwig & Ortmann 2001) as one point of departure to question the usefulness of monetary incentives for experimental work. In making his case, he misrepresents our analysis, and continues the unfortunate ritual of opportunistic sampling of evidence. As in our target article, we call for an empirical analysis of the impact of monetary incentives.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economic Institute, Prague in its series CERGE-EI Working Papers with number
wp307.
Find related papers by JEL classification: C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
Cited by: (explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)
Paola Manzini & Marco Mariotti, 2007.
"Choice Over Time,"
IZA Discussion Papers
2993, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
[Downloadable!]
Other versions:
Paola Manzini & Marco Mariotti, 2007.
"Choice over Time,"
Working Papers
605, Queen Mary, University of London, Department of Economics.
[Downloadable!]