Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

More risk - less solidarity? An experimental investigation

Contents:

Author Info

  • Costard, Jano
Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    A solidarity game was conducted where participants were able to choose between two lotteries with same expected values. However, in one lottery, the risky one, participants faced a higher probability to receive no endowment. The winners were then able to discriminate between subjects risk attitude when it came to voluntary transfers from winners to losers in randomly formed three person groups. The results indicated that risk takers were not fully held responsible for their self-inflicted neediness, although they received on average fewer transfers than non-risk-takers. In fact, group favoritism is observed, where non-risk-takers transferred more to loosing non-risk-takers and risk-takers transferred more to loosing risk-takers. This behavioral pattern was stable across different versions of group compounding, profession and gender. Nevertheless, a gender effect was found with regard to lottery choice and the amount of money transferred. Furthermore, similarities can be seen between the results of the experiment and certain aspects of the current financial crisis. Among them borrowing in non-recourse states in the USA, the role of rating agencies and the hiring of failed CEOs. -- Es wurde ein Solidaritätsspiel durchgeführt, in dem die Teilnehmer aus zwei Lotterien mit gleichen Erwartungswerten wählen konnten. Allerdings war die Wahrscheinlichkeit zu verlieren und keinen Gewinn zu erhalten bei der riskanten Lotterie höher. In Dreiergruppen, bestehend aus Gewinnern und Verlierern, hatten die Gewinner die Möglichkeit freiwillig etwas von ihrem Gewinn an die Verlierer abzugeben. Dabei konnten sie zwischen dem Risikoverhalten der Verlierer unterscheiden. Die Ergebnisse offenbaren, dass risikoreiche Verlierer nicht komplett für ihre selbstverschuldete "Armut" verantwortlich gemacht wurden, obwohl sie im Durchschnitt weniger Transfers erhielten als Verlierer die kein Risiko eingegangen sind. Vielmehr ist ein Favorisieren der eigenen Gruppe zu beobachten, wobei "risikolose Gewinner" mehr an "risikolose Verlierer" transferiert haben und "risikoreiche Gewinner" mehr an "risikoreiche Verlierer" transferierten. Dieses Verhaltensmuster ist stabil über verschiedene Gruppenzusammensetzungen, die fachliche Ausrichtung und das Geschlecht der Teilnehmer des Experiments. Im Gegensatz dazu wurde ein geschlechtsspezifischer Effekt bei der Wahl der Lotterie und bei der Höhe der Transfers beobachtet.

    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://econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/44354/1/611458586.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Bibliographic Info

    Paper provided by European University Viadrina Frankfurt (Oder), Department of Business Administration and Economics in its series Discussion Papers with number 278 [rev.].

    as in new window
    Length:
    Date of creation: 2011
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:zbw:euvwdp:278r

    Contact details of provider:
    Postal: Grosse Scharrnstrasse 59, 15230 Frankfurt (Oder)
    Phone: +49 (0)335 5534 2387
    Fax: +49 (0)335 5534 2516
    Email:
    Web page: http://www.wiwi.euv-frankfurt-o.de/en/index.html
    More information through EDIRC

    Related research

    Keywords:

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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. Buchner, Susanne & Coricelli, Giorgio & Greiner, Ben, 2007. "Self-centered and other-regarding behavior in the solidarity game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 293-303, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    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:zbw:euvwdp:278r

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics).

    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.