IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aea/aecrev/v105y2015i5p621-24.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Trust and Reciprocity between Spouses in India

Author

Listed:
  • Carolina Castilla

Abstract

I present results from the first trust game conducted among married couples. The experiment consisted of a one-shot trust game where spouses were taken into separate rooms, not allowed to communicate, given a significant endowment, and both strategies and payoffs were common knowledge. Results indicate that only 3 percent of spouses in the sender role transfer the entire amount; the average proportion sent is 57 percent of the endowment. The limited sending is costly because the household on average is walking away with half of the potential earnings. The results provide further evidence of the lack of Pareto Efficiency within the household.

Suggested Citation

  • Carolina Castilla, 2015. "Trust and Reciprocity between Spouses in India," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(5), pages 621-624, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:aea:aecrev:v:105:y:2015:i:5:p:621-24
    Note: DOI: 10.1257/aer.p20151117
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/aer.p20151117
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.aeaweb.org/aer/ds/10505/P2015_1117_ds.zip
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.aeaweb.org/aer/data/10505/P2015_1117_data.zip
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to AEA members and institutional subscribers.
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anandi Mani, 0. "Mine, Yours or Ours? The Efficiency of Household Investment Decisions: An Experimental Approach," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 34(3), pages 575-596.
    2. Jonathan Robinson, 2012. "Limited Insurance within the Household: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Kenya," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 4(4), pages 140-164, October.
    3. Duflo, Esther & Udry, Christopher R., 2003. "Intrahousehold Resource Allocation in Cote D'Ivoire: Social Norms, Separate Accounts and Consumption Choices," Center Discussion Papers 28404, Yale University, Economic Growth Center.
    4. Carolina Castilla & Thomas Walker, 2013. "Is Ignorance Bliss? The Effect of Asymmetric Information between Spouses on Intra-household Allocations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(3), pages 263-268, May.
    5. Nava Ashraf, 2009. "Spousal Control and Intra-household Decision Making: An Experimental Study in the Philippines," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(4), pages 1245-1277, September.
    6. Udry, Christopher, 1996. "Gender, Agricultural Production, and the Theory of the Household," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(5), pages 1010-1046, October.
    7. Gustavo J. Bobonis, 2009. "Is the Allocation of Resources within the Household Efficient? New Evidence from a Randomized Experiment," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 117(3), pages 453-503, June.
    8. Schechter, Laura, 2007. "Traditional trust measurement and the risk confound: An experiment in rural Paraguay," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 272-292, February.
    9. Mani, Anandi, 2011. "Mine, Yours or Ours? The Efficiency of Household Investment Decisions: An Experimental Approach," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 64, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    10. Cox, James C., 2004. "How to identify trust and reciprocity," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 260-281, February.
    11. Abigail Barr, 2003. "Trust and expected trustworthiness: experimental evidence from zimbabwean villages," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 113(489), pages 614-630, July.
    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


    Cited by:

    1. Matthew Lowe, 2020. "Types of Contact: A Field Experiment on Collaborative and Adversarial Caste Integration," CESifo Working Paper Series 8089, CESifo.
    2. Castilla, Carolina, 2019. "What's yours is mine, and what's mine is mine: Field experiment on income concealing between spouses in India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 125-140.
    3. Baland, Jean-Marie & Bequet, Ludovic & Guirkinger, Catherine & Manuel, Clarice, 2024. "Sharing norm, household efficiency and female demand for agency in the Philippines," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    4. Arjan Verschoor & Bereket Kebede & Alistair Munro & Marcela Tarazona, 2019. "Spousal Control and Efficiency of Intra-household Decision-Making: Experiments among Married Couples in India, Ethiopia and Nigeria," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 31(4), pages 1171-1196, September.
    5. Gonzalez Ramirez, M. Jimena & Meriggi, Niccolo, 2016. "A Study of Intra-household and Gender Differences in Risk Preferences and Their Effect on Household Investment Decisions in Rural Cameroon," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 236078, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Fafchamps, Marcel & Said, Farah & d Adda, Giovanna, 2016. "Gender and Agency within the Household: Experimental Evidence from Pakistan," CEPR Discussion Papers 11464, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    7. Alistair Munro, 2018. "Intra†Household Experiments: A Survey," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(1), pages 134-175, February.
    8. Cheryl R. Doss & Agnes R. Quisumbing, 2020. "Understanding rural household behavior: Beyond Boserup and Becker," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 51(1), pages 47-58, January.
    9. Matthew K. Gnagey & Therese C. Grijalva & Rong Rong, 2018. "Spousal Dictator Game: Household Decisions and Other-Regarding Preferences," Games, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-11, September.
    10. Roxanne J. Kovacs & Mylene Lagarde & John Cairns, 2019. "Measuring patient trust: Comparing measures from a survey and an economic experiment," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(5), pages 641-652, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Arjan Verschoor & Bereket Kebede & Alistair Munro & Marcela Tarazona, 2019. "Spousal Control and Efficiency of Intra-household Decision-Making: Experiments among Married Couples in India, Ethiopia and Nigeria," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 31(4), pages 1171-1196, September.
    2. Hoel, Jessica B., 2015. "Heterogeneous households: A within-subject test of asymmetric information between spouses in Kenya," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 123-135.
    3. Uzma Afzal & Giovanna d'Adda & Marcel Fafchamps & Farah Said, 2016. "Gender and Agency within the Household: Experimental Evidence from Pakistan," Framed Field Experiments 00555, The Field Experiments Website.
    4. Matthias Doepke & Michèle Tertilt, 2019. "Does female empowerment promote economic development?," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 309-343, December.
    5. Miriam Beblo & Denis Beninger, 2017. "Do husbands and wives pool their incomes? A couple experiment," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 779-805, September.
    6. Castilla, Carolina, 2019. "What's yours is mine, and what's mine is mine: Field experiment on income concealing between spouses in India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 125-140.
    7. Jean-Marie Baland & Roberta Ziparo, 2017. "Intra-household bargaining in poor countries," WIDER Working Paper Series 108, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    8. Doepke, M. & Tertilt, M., 2016. "Families in Macroeconomics," Handbook of Macroeconomics, in: J. B. Taylor & Harald Uhlig (ed.), Handbook of Macroeconomics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1789-1891, Elsevier.
    9. Jayachandran, Seema & Jack, Kelsey & Rao, Sarojini, 2018. "Environmental externalities and free-riding in the household," CEPR Discussion Papers 12558, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    10. Jean-Marie Baland & Roberta Ziparo, 2017. "Intra-household bargaining in poor countries," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2017-108, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    11. Deschênes, Sarah & Dumas, Christelle & Lambert, Sylvie, 2020. "Household resources and individual strategies," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    12. Bjorvatn, Kjetil & Getahun, Tigabu Degu & Halvorsen, Sandra Kristine, 2020. "Conflict or cooperation? Experimental evidence on intra-household allocations in Ethiopia," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    13. Michele Tertilt & Matthias Doepke, 2015. "Asymmetric Information in Couples," 2015 Meeting Papers 606, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    14. Marcos A. Rangel & Duncan Thomas, 2019. "Decision-Making in Complex Households," Working Papers 2019-070, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
    15. Sarah Reynolds, 2015. "Behavioral games and intrahousehold allocation: teenage mothers and their mothers in Brazil," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 901-927, December.
    16. Gurven, Michael & Hopfensitz, Astrid & Kaplan, Hillard & Stieglitz, Jonathan, 2016. "Why household inefficiency? An experimental approach to assess spousal resource distribution preferences in a subsistence population undergoing socioeconomic change," IAST Working Papers 16-36, Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse (IAST).
    17. Carlsson, Fredrik & Yang, Xiaojun, 2013. "Intertemporal Choice Shifts in Households: Do they occur and are they good?," Working Papers in Economics 569, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    18. Anderson, C. Leigh & Reynolds, Travis W. & Gugerty, Mary Kay, 2017. "Husband and Wife Perspectives on Farm Household Decision-making Authority and Evidence on Intra-household Accord in Rural Tanzania," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 169-183.
    19. Thomas, Duncan & Rangel, Marcos, 2020. "Decision-Making in Complex Households," CEPR Discussion Papers 14278, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    20. Alistair Munro, 2018. "Intra†Household Experiments: A Survey," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(1), pages 134-175, February.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C70 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - General
    • D13 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Household Production and Intrahouse Allocation
    • J12 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Marriage; Marital Dissolution; Family Structure
    • O12 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Microeconomic Analyses of Economic Development
    • Z13 - Other Special Topics - - Cultural Economics - - - Economic Sociology; Economic Anthropology; Language; Social and Economic Stratification

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aea:aecrev:v:105:y:2015:i:5:p:621-24. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Michael P. Albert (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aeaaaea.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.