The triadic design to identify trust and reciprocity: Extensions and robustness
AbstractOur paper reconsiders the triadic design proposed by Cox (2004) to identify trust and reciprocity in investment games. Specifically, we extend the design in two directions. First, we elicit expectations by a fixed-fee incentive scheme and test the coherence of them with the triadic outcomes. We expect that if trust is reported by the triadic design, investors’ expected gains should be also observed. Second, we collect information about participants’ choices by using both direct-response (as Cox) and strategy method. By the latter we are able to control reciprocity for initial inequality, which is endogenous when reciprocity is investigated. Finally, we test the existence of an emotional bias, i.e. we test if expectations mismatches induce participant to change actual choices from the planned ones.
Download InfoIf 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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Department of Communication, University of Teramo in its series wp.comunite with number 0096.
Date of creation: Nov 2012
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://wp.comunite.it/
Conditional and unconditional motivations; other-regarding preferences; trust; reciprocity; investment game; expectation; inequality; strategy method;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- D03 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Behavioral Microeconomics; Underlying Principles
- C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
- D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search, Learning, and Information
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2012-12-06 (All new papers)
- NEP-EVO-2012-12-06 (Evolutionary Economics)
- NEP-EXP-2012-12-06 (Experimental Economics)
- NEP-SOC-2012-12-06 (Social Norms & Social Capital)
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.:
- Giorgio Coricelli & Luis González Morales & Amelie Mahlstedt, 2006.
"The Investment Game With Asymmetric Information,"
Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(1), pages 13-30, 02.
- Charness, Gary B, 2004.
"Attribution And Reciprocity In An Experimental Labor Market,"
University of California at Santa Barbara, Economics Working Paper Series
qt8rp6b18c, Department of Economics, UC Santa Barbara.
- Gary Charness, 2004. "Attribution and Reciprocity in an Experimental Labor Market," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 22(3), pages 665-688, July.
- Charness, Gary & Haruvy, Ernan, 2002.
"Altruism, equity, and reciprocity in a gift-exchange experiment: an encompassing approach,"
Games and Economic Behavior,
Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 203-231, August.
- Gary Charness & Ernan Haruvy, 1999. "Altruism, equity and reciprocity in a gift-exchange experiment: An encompassing approach," Economics Working Papers 368, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
- Charness, Gary B & Haruvy, Ernan, 1999. "Altruism, Equity, And Reciprocity In A Gift-Exchange Experiment: An Encompassing Approach," University of California at Santa Barbara, Economics Working Paper Series qt01n8x8m3, Department of Economics, UC Santa Barbara.
- Berg Joyce & Dickhaut John & McCabe Kevin, 1995. "Trust, Reciprocity, and Social History," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 122-142, July.
- James C. Cox & Cary A. Deck, 2006.
"When Are Women More Generous than Men?,"
Western Economic Association International, vol. 44(4), pages 587-598, October.
- James C. Cox & Cary A. Deck, 2006. "When are Women More Generous than Men?," Experimental Economics Center Working Paper Series 2006-07, Experimental Economics Center, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
- Guth, Werner & Schmittberger, Rolf & Schwarze, Bernd, 1982. "An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 367-388, December.
- Luca Stanca & Luigino Bruni & Marco Mantovani, 2011.
"The effect of motivations on social indirect reciprocity: an experimental analysis,"
Applied Economics Letters,
Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(17), pages 1709-1711.
- Luca Stanca & Luigino Bruni & Marco Mantovani, 2009. "The Effect of Motivations on Social Indirect Reciprocity: an Experimental Analysis," Working Papers 169, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised Aug 2009.
- repec:kap:expeco:v:11:y:2008:i:1:p:1-24 is not listed on IDEAS
- James C. Cox & Cary A. Deck, 2005. "On the Nature of Reciprocal Motives," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 43(3), pages 623-635, July.
- W. Guth & R. Schmittberger & B. Schwartz, 2010. "An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining," Levine's Working Paper Archive 291, David K. Levine.
- Luca Stanca, 2008.
"How to be kind? Outcomes versus Intentions as Determinants of Fairness,"
145, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised Jul 2008.
- Stanca, Luca, 2010. "How to be kind? Outcomes versus intentions as determinants of fairness," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 106(1), pages 19-21, January.
- Benedetto Gui & Luca Stanca, 2010. "Happiness and relational goods: well-being and interpersonal relations in the economic sphere," International Review of Economics, Springer, vol. 57(2), pages 105-118, June.
- Luca Stanca & Luigino Bruni & Luca Corazzini, 2007.
"Testing Theories of Reciprocity: Do Motivations Matter?,"
109, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised 2007.
- Stanca, Luca & Bruni, Luigino & Corazzini, Luca, 2009. "Testing theories of reciprocity: Do motivations matter?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 233-245, August.
- Manski, Charles F., 2002. "Identification of decision rules in experiments on simple games of proposal and response," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(4-5), pages 880-891, May.
- James Cox, 2009. "Trust and reciprocity: implications of game triads and social contexts," New Zealand Economic Papers, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(2), pages 89-104.
- Cox, James C., 2004. "How to identify trust and reciprocity," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 260-281, February.
- Jordi Brandts & Gary Charness, 2011. "The strategy versus the direct-response method: a first survey of experimental comparisons," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 375-398, September.
- Nava Ashraf & Iris Bohnet & Nikita Piankov, 2006. "Decomposing trust and trustworthiness," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 9(3), pages 193-208, September.
- Brülhart, Marius & Usunier, Jean-Claude, 2012. "Does the trust game measure trust?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 115(1), pages 20-23.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Giovanni Di Bartolomeo).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.