Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Field experiments

Contents:

Author Info

  • Glenn Harrison
  • John List

Abstract

Experimental economists are leaving the reservation. They are recruiting subjects in the field rather than in the classroom, using field goods rather than induced valuations, and using field context rather than abstract terminology in instructions. We argue that there is something methodologically fundamental behind this trend. Field experiments differ from laboratory experiments in many ways. Although it is tempting to view field experiments as simply less controlled variants of laboratory experiments, we argue that to do so would be to seriously mischaracterize them. What passes for "control" in laboratory experiments might in fact be precisely the opposite if it is artificial to the subject or context of the task. We propose six factors that can be used to determine the field context of an experiment: the nature of the subject pool, the nature of the information that the subjects bring to the task, the nature of the commodity, the nature of the task or trading rules applied, the nature of the stakes, and the environment that subjects operate in.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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.
File URL: http://karlan.yale.edu/fieldexperiments/papers/00058.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by The Field Experiments Website in its series Artefactual Field Experiments with number 00058.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: 2004
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:feb:artefa:00058

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.fieldexperiments.com

Related research

Keywords:

Other versions of this item:

References

References listed on IDEAS
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.:
as in new window
  1. Conlisk, John, 1989. "Three Variants on the Allais Example," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 79(3), pages 392-407, June.
  2. Frech, H E, III, 1976. "The Property Rights Theory of the Firm: Empirical Results from a Natural Experiment," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, University of Chicago Press, vol. 84(1), pages 143-52, February.
  3. Richard Blundell & Monica Costa Dias, 2002. "Alternative approaches to evaluation in empirical microeconomics," CeMMAP working papers, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies CWP10/02, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
  4. Bohm, Peter, 1979. " Estimating Willingness to Pay: Why and How?," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 81(2), pages 142-53.
  5. Jeff Carpenter & Amrita Daniere & Lois Takahashi, 2004. "Cooperation, trust, and social capital in southeast asian urban slums," Artefactual Field Experiments, The Field Experiments Website 00035, The Field Experiments Website.
  6. David Lucking-Reiley, 1999. "Using Field Experiments to Test Equivalence between Auction Formats: Magic on the Internet," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1063-1080, December.
  7. Rajeev H. Dehejia & Sadek Wahba, 2002. "Propensity Score-Matching Methods For Nonexperimental Causal Studies," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(1), pages 151-161, February.
  8. William Vickrey, 1961. "Counterspeculation, Auctions, And Competitive Sealed Tenders," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, American Finance Association, vol. 16(1), pages 8-37, 03.
  9. Alvin E. Roth & V. Prasnikar & M. Okuno-Fujiwara & S. Zamir, 1998. "Bargaining and market behavior in Jerusalem, Liubljana, Pittsburgh and Tokyo: an experimental study," Levine's Working Paper Archive 344, David K. Levine.
  10. Deacon, Robert T & Sonstelie, Jon, 1985. "Rationing by Waiting and the Value of Time: Results from a Natural Experiment," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, University of Chicago Press, vol. 93(4), pages 627-47, August.
  11. John A. List & David Lucking-Reiley, 2000. "The Effects of Seed Money and Refunds on Charitable Giving: Experimental Evidence from a University Capital Campaign," Vanderbilt University Department of Economics Working Papers 0008, Vanderbilt University Department of Economics.
  12. John H. Kagel & Dan Levin, 1999. "Common Value Auctions with Insider Information," Econometrica, Econometric Society, Econometric Society, vol. 67(5), pages 1219-1238, September.
  13. Forsythe, Robert & Forrest Nelson & George R. Neumann & Jack Wright, 1992. "Anatomy of an Experimental Political Stock Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 82(5), pages 1142-61, December.
  14. John A. List, 2003. "Neoclassical Theory Versus Prospect Theory: Evidence from the Marketplace," NBER Working Papers 9736, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  15. John List, 2004. "Testing neoclassical competitive theory in multi-lateral decentralized markets," Framed Field Experiments, The Field Experiments Website 00176, The Field Experiments Website.
  16. James T. Hong & Charles R. Plott, 1982. "Rate Filing Policies for Inland Water Transportation: An Experimental Approach," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, The RAND Corporation, vol. 13(1), pages 1-19, Spring.
  17. Dirk Engelmann & Veronika Grimm, 2006. "Bidding Behavior in Multi-Unit Auctions - An Experimental Investigation," Working Paper Series in Economics, University of Cologne, Department of Economics 24, University of Cologne, Department of Economics.
  18. Milgrom, Paul R & Weber, Robert J, 1982. "A Theory of Auctions and Competitive Bidding," Econometrica, Econometric Society, Econometric Society, vol. 50(5), pages 1089-1122, September.
  19. William Harbaugh & Kate Krause & Lise Vesterlund, 2002. "Risk Attitudes of Children and Adults: Choices Over Small and Large Probability Gains and Losses," Experimental Economics, Springer, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 53-84, June.
  20. Glenn W. Harrison & Morten I. Lau & Melonie B. Williams, 2001. "Estimating Individual Discount Rates in Denmark: A Field Experiment," NCEE Working Paper Series, National Center for Environmental Economics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 200102, National Center for Environmental Economics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, revised Nov 2001.
  21. Cummings, Ronald G, et al, 1997. "Are Hypothetical Referenda Incentive Compatible?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(3), pages 609-21, June.
  22. Smith, Vernon L, 1982. "Microeconomic Systems as an Experimental Science," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 72(5), pages 923-55, December.
  23. Glenn Harrison, 2006. "Experimental Evidence on Alternative Environmental Valuation Methods," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 34(1), pages 125-162, 05.
  24. List, John A. & Rasul, Imran, 2011. "Field Experiments in Labor Economics," Handbook of Labor Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier.
  25. Smith, Vernon L & Suchanek, Gerry L & Williams, Arlington W, 1988. "Bubbles, Crashes, and Endogenous Expectations in Experimental Spot Asset Markets," Econometrica, Econometric Society, Econometric Society, vol. 56(5), pages 1119-51, September.
  26. Dyer, D. & Kagel, J.H. & Levin, D., 1988. "A Comparison Of Naive And Experienced Bidders In Common Value Offer Auctions A Laboratory Analysis," Papers, Houston - Department of Economics 11, Houston - Department of Economics.
  27. Isaac, R Mark & Smith, Vernon L, 1985. "In Search of Predatory Pricing," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, University of Chicago Press, vol. 93(2), pages 320-45, April.
  28. John A. List, 2004. "The Nature and Extent of Discrimination in the Marketplace: Evidence from the Field," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, MIT Press, vol. 119(1), pages 49-89, February.
  29. Harrison, Glenn W, 1992. "Market Dynamics, Programmed Traders and Futures Markets: Beginning the Laboratory Search for a Smoking Gun," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 0(0), pages 46-62, Supplemen.
  30. Loomes, Graham & Sugden, Robert, 1995. "Incorporating a stochastic element into decision theories," European Economic Review, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 39(3-4), pages 641-648, April.
  31. Laura O. Taylor & Ronald G. Cummings, 1999. "Unbiased Value Estimates for Environmental Goods: A Cheap Talk Design for the Contingent Valuation Method," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 89(3), pages 649-665, June.
  32. Johnson, Eric J. & Camerer, Colin & Sen, Sankar & Rymon, Talia, 2002. "Detecting Failures of Backward Induction: Monitoring Information Search in Sequential Bargaining," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 104(1), pages 16-47, May.
  33. Meyer, Bruce D & Viscusi, W Kip & Durbin, David L, 1995. "Workers' Compensation and Injury Duration: Evidence from a Natural Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 85(3), pages 322-40, June.
  34. Harrison, Glen W. & Ronald M. Harstad & E. Elisabet Rutström, 1995. "Experimental Methods and Elicitation of Values," Discussion Paper Serie B 349, University of Bonn, Germany.
  35. Peter Bohm, 1972. "Estimating the demand for public goods: An experiment," Framed Field Experiments, The Field Experiments Website 00126, The Field Experiments Website.
  36. Maribeth Coller & Melonie Williams, 1999. "Eliciting Individual Discount Rates," Experimental Economics, Springer, Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 107-127, December.
  37. John List, 2004. "Young, selfish, and male: Field evidence of social preferences," Natural Field Experiments, The Field Experiments Website 00298, The Field Experiments Website.
  38. James J. Heckman, 1998. "Detecting Discrimination," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 12(2), pages 101-116, Spring.
  39. Rafael Tenorio & Timothy N. Cason, 2002. "To Spin or Not to Spin? Natural and Laboratory Experiments from "The Price is Right"," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, Royal Economic Society, vol. 112(476), pages 170-195, January.
  40. Grether, David M. & Plott, Charles R., . "The Effects of Market Practices in Oligopolistic Markets: An Experimental Examination of the Ethyl Case," Working Papers, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences 404, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
  41. Carbone, Enrica, 1997. "Investigation of stochastic preference theory using experimental data," Economics Letters, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 305-311, December.
  42. Glenn W. Harrison & John A. List, 2004. "Field Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(4), pages 1009-1055, December.
  43. Cummings, Ronald G & Harrison, Glenn W & Rutstrom, E Elisabet, 1995. "Homegrown Values and Hypothetical Surveys: Is the Dichotomous Choice Approach Incentive-Compatible?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 85(1), pages 260-66, March.
  44. Levine, Michael E. & Plott, Charles R., . "Agenda Influence and Its Implications," Working Papers, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences 151, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
  45. Harrison, Glenn W & Rutherford, Thomas F & Tarr, David G, 1997. "Quantifying the Uruguay Round," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, Royal Economic Society, vol. 107(444), pages 1405-30, September.
  46. Peter Bohm & Hans Lind, 1993. "Preference reversal, real-world lotteries, and lottery-interested subjects," Framed Field Experiments, The Field Experiments Website 00131, The Field Experiments Website.
  47. Hey, John D & Orme, Chris, 1994. "Investigating Generalizations of Expected Utility Theory Using Experimental Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, Econometric Society, vol. 62(6), pages 1291-1326, November.
  48. Michael Haigh & John List, 2005. "Do professional traders exhibit myopic loss aversion? An experimental analysis," Artefactual Field Experiments, The Field Experiments Website 00052, The Field Experiments Website.
  49. Rutstrom, E. Elisabet & Williams, Melonie B., 2000. "Entitlements and fairness:: an experimental study of distributive preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 75-89, September.
  50. Bohm, Peter, 1972. "Estimating demand for public goods: An experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 3(2), pages 111-130.
  51. Grether, David M & Isaac, R Mark & Plott, Charles R, 1981. "The Allocation of Landing Rights by Unanimity among Competitors," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 71(2), pages 166-71, May.
  52. Douglas Dyer & John H. Kagel, 1996. "Bidding in Common Value Auctions: How the Commercial Construction Industry Corrects for the Winner's Curse," Management Science, INFORMS, INFORMS, vol. 42(10), pages 1463-1475, October.
  53. Loomes, G. & Moffatt, P.G. & Sugden, R., 1998. "A Microeconometric Test of Alternative Stochastic Theories of Risky Choice," University of East Anglia Discussion Papers in Economics, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK. 9806, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
  54. Vernon L. Smith, 1962. "An Experimental Study of Competitive Market Behavior," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, University of Chicago Press, vol. 70, pages 322.
  55. Harless, David W & Camerer, Colin F, 1994. "The Predictive Utility of Generalized Expected Utility Theories," Econometrica, Econometric Society, Econometric Society, vol. 62(6), pages 1251-89, November.
  56. Smith, V. Kerry & Osborne, Laura L., 1996. "Do Contingent Valuation Estimates Pass a "Scope" Test? A Meta-analysis," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 287-301, November.
  57. Harrison, Glenn W. & Lesley, James C., 1996. "Must Contingent Valuation Surveys Cost So Much?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 79-95, July.
  58. James Cox & Stephen Hayne, 2006. "Barking up the right tree: Are small groups rational agents?," Experimental Economics, Springer, Springer, vol. 9(3), pages 209-222, September.
  59. John Kagel & Raymond Battalio & Leonard Green, 1995. "Economic choice theory. an experimental analysis of animal behavior," Framed Field Experiments, The Field Experiments Website 00166, The Field Experiments Website.
  60. Karlan, Dean & List, John, 2006. "Does Price Matter in Charitable Giving? Evidence from a Large-Scale Natural Field Experiment," Working Papers, Yale University, Department of Economics 13, Yale University, Department of Economics.
  61. Peter Bohm, 1979. "Estimating willingness to pay: Why and how?," Framed Field Experiments, The Field Experiments Website 00127, The Field Experiments Website.
  62. Kip Smith & John Dickhaut & Kevin McCabe & José V. Pardo, 2002. "Neuronal Substrates for Choice Under Ambiguity, Risk, Gains, and Losses," Management Science, INFORMS, INFORMS, vol. 48(6), pages 711-718, June.
  63. Plott, Charles R & Levine, Michael E, 1978. "A Model of Agenda Influence on Committee Decisions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 68(1), pages 146-60, March.
  64. Smith, Vernon L, 1991. "Rational Choice: The Contrast between Economics and Psychology," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, University of Chicago Press, vol. 99(4), pages 877-97, August.
  65. Gertner, Robert, 1993. "Game Shows and Economic Behavior: Risk-Taking on "Card Sharks."," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, MIT Press, vol. 108(2), pages 507-21, May.
  66. Hans Binswanger, 1980. "Attitudes toward risk: Experimental measurement in rural india," Artefactual Field Experiments, The Field Experiments Website 00009, The Field Experiments Website.
  67. William T. Harbaugh & Kate Krause & Timothy R. Berry, 2001. "GARP for Kids: On the Development of Rational Choice Behavior," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1539-1545, December.
  68. Hans Binswanger, 1981. "Attitudes toward risk: Theoretical implications of an experiment in rural india," Artefactual Field Experiments, The Field Experiments Website 00010, The Field Experiments Website.
  69. John A. List, 2007. "Field Experiments: A Bridge Between Lab and Naturally-Occurring Data," NBER Working Papers 12992, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  70. Lisa Cameron, 1995. "Raising the Stakes in the Ultimatum Game: Experimental Evidence From Indonesia," Working Papers, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section. 724, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section..
  71. Eckel, Catherine C. & Grossman, Philip J., 1996. "Altruism in Anonymous Dictator Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 181-191, October.
  72. Bateman, Ian J, et al, 1997. "Does Part-Whole Bias Exist? An Experimental Investigation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, Royal Economic Society, vol. 107(441), pages 322-32, March.
  73. Levitt, Steven D, 2004. "Testing Theories of Discrimination: Evidence from Weakest Link," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, University of Chicago Press, vol. 47(2), pages 431-52, October.
  74. Berg Joyce & Dickhaut John & McCabe Kevin, 1995. "Trust, Reciprocity, and Social History," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 122-142, July.
  75. Caroline M. Hoxby, 2000. "The Effects Of Class Size On Student Achievement: New Evidence From Population Variation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, MIT Press, vol. 115(4), pages 1239-1285, November.
  76. Shane Frederick & George Loewenstein & Ted O'Donoghue, 2002. "Time Discounting and Time Preference: A Critical Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 40(2), pages 351-401, June.
  77. Colin Camerer, 1998. "Can asset markets be manipulated? A field experiment with racetrack betting," Natural Field Experiments, The Field Experiments Website 00222, The Field Experiments Website.
  78. Fan, Chinn-Ping, 2002. "Allais paradox in the small," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 411-421, November.
  79. William Harbaugh & Kate Krause & Timothy Berry, 2001. "Garp for kids: On the development of rational choice behavior," Artefactual Field Experiments, The Field Experiments Website 00056, The Field Experiments Website.
  80. repec:feb:framed:0049 is not listed on IDEAS
  81. Behrman, Jere R & Rosenzweig, Mark R & Taubman, Paul, 1994. "Endowments and the Allocation of Schooling in the Family and in the Marriage Market: The Twins Experiment," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, University of Chicago Press, vol. 102(6), pages 1131-74, December.
  82. Beetsma, R.M.W.J. & Schotman, P.C., 1998. "Measuring Risk Attitudes in a Natural Experiment: Data from The Television Game Show LINGO," Papers, Southern California - School of Business Administration 98-48, Southern California - School of Business Administration.
  83. Carson, R.T. & Mitchell, R.C. & Hanemann, W.M. & Kopp, R.J. & Presser, S. & Ruud, P.A., 1992. "A Contingent Valuation Study of Lost Passive Use Values Resulting From the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill," MPRA Paper 6984, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  84. Robert Slonim & Alvin E. Roth, 1998. "Learning in High Stakes Ultimatum Games: An Experiment in the Slovak Republic," Econometrica, Econometric Society, Econometric Society, vol. 66(3), pages 569-596, May.
  85. Chaim Fershtman & Uri Gneezy, 2001. "Discrimination In A Segmented Society: An Experimental Approach," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, MIT Press, vol. 116(1), pages 351-377, February.
  86. John A. List, 2001. "Do Explicit Warnings Eliminate the Hypothetical Bias in Elicitation Procedures? Evidence from Field Auctions for Sportscards," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1498-1507, December.
  87. Colin F. Camerer, 1998. "Can Asset Markets Be Manipulated? A Field Experiment with Racetrack Betting," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, University of Chicago Press, vol. 106(3), pages 457-482, June.
  88. Berk, Jonathan B & Hughson, Eric & Vandezande, Kirk, 1996. "The Price Is Right, but Are the Bids? An Investigation of Rational Decision Theory," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 86(4), pages 954-70, September.
  89. Dale Whittington, 2002. "Improving the Performance of Contingent Valuation Studies in Developing Countries," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 22(1), pages 323-367, June.
  90. William Harbaugh & Kate Krause & Lise Vesterlund, 2002. "Risk attitudes of children and adults: Choices over small and large probability gains and losses," Artefactual Field Experiments, The Field Experiments Website 00055, The Field Experiments Website.
  91. Harrison, Glenn W., 1988. "Predatory pricing in a multiple market experiment : A note," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 405-417, June.
  92. repec:feb:framed:0052 is not listed on IDEAS
  93. John Kagel & Don MacDonald & Raymond Battalio, 1990. "Tests of 'fanning out' of indifference curves: Results from animal and human experiments," Framed Field Experiments, The Field Experiments Website 00165, The Field Experiments Website.
  94. Charles A. Holt & Susan K. Laury, 2002. "Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1644-1655, December.
  95. John Conlisk, 1996. "Why Bounded Rationality?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 34(2), pages 669-700, June.
  96. Loomes, Graham & Sugden, Robert, 1998. "Testing Different Stochastic Specifications of Risky Choice," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 65(260), pages 581-98, November.
  97. repec:feb:artefa:0090 is not listed on IDEAS
  98. Tomas Philipson & Larry V. Hedges, 1998. "Subject Evaluation in Social Experiments," Econometrica, Econometric Society, Econometric Society, vol. 66(2), pages 381-408, March.
  99. P. A. Riach & J. Rich, 2002. "Field Experiments of Discrimination in the Market Place," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, Royal Economic Society, vol. 112(483), pages 480-518, November.
  100. repec:feb:artefa:0057 is not listed on IDEAS
  101. T. Parker Ballinger & Michael G. Palumbo & Nathaniel T. Wilcox, 2003. "Precautionary saving and social learning across generations: an experiment," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, Royal Economic Society, vol. 113(490), pages 920-947, October.
  102. Joseph Henrich, 2000. "Does culture matter in economic behavior? Ultimatum game bargaining among the machiguenga," Artefactual Field Experiments, The Field Experiments Website 00067, The Field Experiments Website.
  103. Saul Pleeter & John T. Warner, 2001. "The Personal Discount Rate: Evidence from Military Downsizing Programs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 91(1), pages 33-53, March.
  104. McCabe, Kevin & Houser, Daniel & Ryan, Lee & Smith, Vernon & Trouard, Ted, 2001. "A Functional Imaging Study of Cooperation in Two-Person reciprocal Exchange," MPRA Paper 5172, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  105. Harrison, Glenn W & Vinod, H D, 1992. "The Sensitivity Analysis of Applied General Equilibrium Models: Completely Randomized Factorial Sampling Designs," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 74(2), pages 357-62, May.
  106. Machina, Mark J, 1989. "Dynamic Consistency and Non-expected Utility Models of Choice under Uncertainty," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 27(4), pages 1622-68, December.
  107. John List & David Lucking-Reiley, 2000. "Demand reduction in a multi-unit auction: Evidence from a sportscard field experiment," Framed Field Experiments, The Field Experiments Website 00180, The Field Experiments Website.
  108. Tanga McDaniel & E. Rutström, 2001. "Decision Making Costs and Problem Solving Performance," Experimental Economics, Springer, Springer, vol. 4(2), pages 145-161, October.
  109. Mitch Kunce & Shelby Gerking & William Morgan, 2002. "Effects of Environmental and Land Use Regulation in the Oil and Gas Industry Using the Wyoming Checkerboard as an Experimental Design," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1588-1593, December.
  110. Cubitt, Robin P. & Sugden, Robert, 2001. "On Money Pumps," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 121-160, October.
  111. Harrison, Glenn W, 1992. "Theory and Misbehavior of First-Price Auctions: Reply," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 82(5), pages 1426-43, December.
  112. Hey, John D., 1995. "Experimental investigations of errors in decision making under risk," European Economic Review, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 39(3-4), pages 633-640, April.
  113. Dufwenberg, Martin & Gneezy, Uri, 2000. "Measuring Beliefs in an Experimental Lost Wallet Game," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 163-182, February.
  114. Bronars, Stephen G & Grogger, Jeff, 1994. "The Economic Consequences of Unwed Motherhood: Using Twin Births as a Natural Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 84(5), pages 1141-56, December.
  115. Glenn W. Harrison & John A. List, 2007. "Naturally Occurring Markets and Exogenous Laboratory Experiments: A Case Study of the Winner's Curse," NBER Working Papers 13072, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  116. John Dickhaut & Kevin McCabe & Jennifer C. Nagode & Aldo Rustichini & Kip Smith & Jose Pardo, 2002. "The impact of the certainty context on the process of choice," CEEL Working Papers, Cognitive and Experimental Economics Laboratory, Department of Economics, University of Trento, Italia 0216, Cognitive and Experimental Economics Laboratory, Department of Economics, University of Trento, Italia.
  117. Ballinger, T Parker & Wilcox, Nathaniel T, 1997. "Decisions, Error and Heterogeneity," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, Royal Economic Society, vol. 107(443), pages 1090-1105, July.
  118. James J. Heckman & Jeffrey A. Smith, 1995. "Assessing the Case for Social Experiments," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 85-110, Spring.
  119. Kagel, John H & Harstad, Ronald M & Levin, Dan, 1987. "Information Impact and Allocation Rules in Auctions with Affiliated Private Values: A Laboratory Study," Econometrica, Econometric Society, Econometric Society, vol. 55(6), pages 1275-1304, November.
  120. Bohm, Peter & Lind, Hans, 1993. "Preference reversal, real-world lotteries, and lottery-interested subjects," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 327-348, December.
  121. repec:feb:framed:0030 is not listed on IDEAS
  122. Hoffman, Elizabeth & McCabe, Kevin A & Smith, Vernon L, 1996. "On Expectations and the Monetary Stakes in Ultimatum Games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 289-301.
  123. Anabela Botelho & Glenn W. Harrison & Marc A. Hirsch & Elisabet E. Rutstrom, 2001. "Bargaining behavior, demographics and nationality: a reconsideration of the experimental evidence," NIMA Working Papers, Núcleo de Investigação em Microeconomia Aplicada (NIMA), Universidade do Minho 16, Núcleo de Investigação em Microeconomia Aplicada (NIMA), Universidade do Minho.
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 in new window

Cited by:
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:feb:artefa:00058. See general 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: (Joe Seidel).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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