Social status and bargaining when resources are scarce: Evidence from a field lab experiment
AbstractThis paper studies how individual social status influences bilateral bargaining in small-scale societies where resources are scarce. It reports the results of a field lab experiment with members of irrigation schemes who participate either as water distributors or receivers. Our results indicate that social status influences bargaining behavior in two ways. First, with social status being positively correlated with economic wealth, our results confirm a self-serving bias in fairness conceptions. Second, social status influences how receivers react to the received share as well as how distributors adapt their distributive decisions after the receivers' reaction. We also highlight implications of the results for the efficient use of scarce resources.
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 School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK. in its series Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Behavioural and Experimental Social Science (CBESS) with number 10-09.
Date of creation: 01 Aug 2010
Date of revision:
Postal: Helen Chapman, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich Research Park, Norwich, NR4 7TJ, UK
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.:
- Pamela Schmitt, 2004. "On Perceptions of Fairness: The Role of Valuations, Outside Options, and Information in Ultimatum Bargaining Games," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 49-73, February.
- Dirk Engelmann & Martin Strobel, 2004.
"Inequality Aversion, Efficiency, and Maximin Preferences in Simple Distribution Experiments,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 94(4), pages 857-869, September.
- Engelmann,Dirk & Strobel,Martin, 2002. "Inequality Aversion, Efficiency, and Maximin Preferences in Simple Distribution Experiments," Research Memorandum 015, Maastricht University, Maastricht Economic Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
- Weiss, Yoram & Fershtman, Chaim, 1998.
"Social status and economic performance:: A survey,"
European Economic Review,
Elsevier, vol. 42(3-5), pages 801-820, May.
- Weiss, Y. & Fershtman, C., 1997. "Social Status and Economic Performance: A Survey," Papers 19-97, Tel Aviv.
- Yoram Weiss & Chaim Fershtman, 1997. "Social Status and Economic Performance: A Survey," University of Chicago - George G. Stigler Center for Study of Economy and State 139, Chicago - Center for Study of Economy and State.
- Armin Falk & Urs Fischbacher, .
"A Theory of Reciprocity,"
IEW - Working Papers
006, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
- Ben D'Exelle & Arno Riedl, 2008.
"Elite Capture, Political Voice and Exclusion from Aid: An Experimental Study,"
CESifo Working Paper Series
2400, CESifo Group Munich.
- Riedl, Arno & Exelle, Ben D, 2008. "Elite Capture, Political Voice and Exclusion from Aid: An Experimental Study," Research Memorandum 024, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
- D'Exelle, Ben & Riedl, Arno, 2008. "Elite Capture, Political Voice and Exclusion from Aid: An Experimental Study," IZA Discussion Papers 3673, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- Juan-Camilo Cardenas & Elinor Ostrom, 2004.
"What do people bring into the game? Experiments in the field about cooperation in the commons,"
Artefactual Field Experiments
00027, The Field Experiments Website.
- Cardenas, Juan-Camilo & Ostrom, Elinor, 2004. "What do people bring into the game? Experiments in the field about cooperation in the commons," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 307-326, December.
- Cárdenas, Juan-Camilo & Ostrom, Elinor, 2004. "What do people bring into the game: experiments in the field about cooperation in the commons," CAPRi working papers 32, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
- James Konow, 2000. "Fair Shares: Accountability and Cognitive Dissonance in Allocation Decisions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(4), pages 1072-1091, September.
- Fehr, Ernst & Schmidt, Klaus M., 1998.
"A Theory of Fairness, Competition and Cooperation,"
CEPR Discussion Papers
1812, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, 1999. "A Theory Of Fairness, Competition, And Cooperation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 114(3), pages 817-868, August.
- 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.
- Alberto Alesina & Nicola Fuchs-Schundeln, 2005.
"Good bye Lenin (or not?): The effect of Communism on people's preferences,"
Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers
2076, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
- Alberto Alesina & Nichola Fuchs Schuendeln, 2005. "Good bye Lenin (or not?): The Effect of Communism on People's Preferences," NBER Working Papers 11700, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Bjorn F.H. Van Campenhout, 2007. "Locally Adapted Poverty Indicators Derived from Participatory Wealth Rankings: A Case of Four Villages in Rural Tanzania," Journal of African Economies, Centre for the Study of African Economies (CSAE), vol. 16(3), pages 406-438, June.
- Cardenas, Juan-Camilo, 2003. "Real wealth and experimental cooperation: experiments in the field lab," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 263-289, April.
- Imai, Kosuke & van Dyk, David A., 2005. "A Bayesian analysis of the multinomial probit model using marginal data augmentation," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 124(2), pages 311-334, February.
- Babcock, Linda, et al, 1995. "Biased Judgments of Fairness in Bargaining," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(5), pages 1337-43, December.
- Olivier Armantier, 2006.
"Do Wealth Differences Affect Fairness Considerations?,"
International Economic Review,
Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 47(2), pages 391-429, 05.
- Olivier Armantier, 2006. "Do Wealth Differences Affect Fairness Considerations?," CIRANO Working Papers 2006s-13, CIRANO.
- Ball, Sheryl & Eckel, Catherine C., 1998.
"The economic value of status,"
Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics),
Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 495-514.
- Ball, Sheryl & Eckel, Catherine C., 1998. "The Economic Value of Status," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 495-514.
- Tilman Slembeck, 1999. "Reputations and Fairness in Bargaining - Experimental Evidence from a Repeated Ultimatum Game With Fixed Opponents," Experimental 9905002, EconWPA.
- Werner Güth & M. Vittoria Levati & Matteo Ploner, 2009. "Making the World a better Place: Experimental evidence from the generosity Game," Jena Economic Research Papers 2009-071, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena, Max-Planck-Institute of Economics.
- W. Guth & R. Schmittberger & B. Schwartz, 2010. "An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining," Levine's Working Paper Archive 291, David K. Levine.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Alasdair Brown).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.