IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/gamebe/v157y2026icp480-495.html

Electoral accountability in the lab

Author

Listed:
  • Martinelli, César
  • Sebastián Esandi, Naila C.

Abstract

We propose a model of electoral accountability, and we test it in a lab setting. As predicted by the model, moral incentives and the desire for reelection interact to deter politicians from accepting bribes early in their careers. Treatments with weaker reelection incentives perform worse in encouraging good initial behavior among politicians, but are more effective in promoting good behavior later on. The probability of voter errors and politicians' intrinsic motivation for good behavior in the final period vary across treatments, with opportunistic behavior being more prevalent in environments with stronger electoral incentives.

Suggested Citation

  • Martinelli, César & Sebastián Esandi, Naila C., 2026. "Electoral accountability in the lab," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 480-495.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:gamebe:v:157:y:2026:i:c:p:480-495
    DOI: 10.1016/j.geb.2025.01.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899825625000090
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.geb.2025.01.008?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marco Battaglini & Rebecca B. Morton & Thomas R. Palfrey, 2010. "The Swing Voter's Curse in the Laboratory," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 77(1), pages 61-89.
    2. Glenn W. Harrison & E. Elisabet Rutström, 2008. "Risk Aversion in the Laboratory," Research in Experimental Economics, in: Risk Aversion in Experiments, pages 41-196, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    3. Uri Gneezy & Aldo Rustichini, 2000. "Pay Enough or Don't Pay at All," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 115(3), pages 791-810.
    4. Jean Tirole & Roland Bénabou, 2006. "Incentives and Prosocial Behavior," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1652-1678, December.
    5. Duk Gyoo Kim, 2020. "Clustering Standard Errors at the "Session" Level," CESifo Working Paper Series 8386, CESifo.
    6. Abigail Barr & Danila Serra, 2009. "The effects of externalities and framing on bribery in a petty corruption experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 12(4), pages 488-503, December.
    7. John Cadigan, 2005. "The Citizen Candidate Model: An Experimental Analysis," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 123(1), pages 197-216, April.
    8. Smith, Vernon L, 1982. "Microeconomic Systems as an Experimental Science," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(5), pages 923-955, December.
    9. Besley, Timothy, 2007. "Principled Agents?: The Political Economy of Good Government," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199283910.
    10. Richard McKelvey & Thomas Palfrey, 2015. "Erratum to: Quantal response equilibria for extensive form games," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(4), pages 762-763, December.
    11. Costas-Pérez, Elena & Solé-Ollé, Albert & Sorribas-Navarro, Pilar, 2012. "Corruption scandals, voter information, and accountability," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 469-484.
    12. Roland Bénabou & Jean Tirole, 2003. "Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 70(3), pages 489-520.
    13. McKelvey Richard D. & Palfrey Thomas R., 1995. "Quantal Response Equilibria for Normal Form Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 6-38, July.
    14. Ananish Chaudhuri, 2012. "Chapter 2 Gender and Corruption: A Survey of the Experimental Evidence," Research in Experimental Economics, in: New Advances in Experimental Research on Corruption, pages 13-49, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    15. Claudio Ferraz & Frederico Finan, 2008. "Exposing Corrupt Politicians: The Effects of Brazil's Publicly Released Audits on Electoral Outcomes," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 123(2), pages 703-745.
    16. Vincent Anesi & Peter Buisseret, 2022. "Making Elections Work: Accountability with Selection and Control," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 14(4), pages 616-644, November.
    17. Danila Serra, 2012. "Combining Top-Down and Bottom-Up Accountability: Evidence from a Bribery Experiment," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 28(3), pages 569-587, August.
    18. Vivi Alatas & Lisa Cameron & Ananish Chaudhuri & Nisvan Erkal & Lata Gangadharan, 2009. "Gender, Culture, and Corruption: Insights from an Experimental Analysis," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 75(3), pages 663-680, January.
    19. Cesar Martinelli, 2022. "Accountability and Grand Corruption," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 14(4), pages 645-679, November.
    20. Claudio Ferraz & Frederico Finan, 2011. "Electoral Accountability and Corruption: Evidence from the Audits of Local Governments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(4), pages 1274-1311, June.
    21. John Duggan & César Martinelli, 2017. "The Political Economy of Dynamic Elections: Accountability, Commitment, and Responsiveness," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 55(3), pages 916-984, September.
    22. Timothy N. Cason & Vai-Lam Mui, 2003. "Testing Political Economy Models of Reform in the Laboratory," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(2), pages 208-212, May.
    23. Vivi Alatas & Lisa Cameron & Ananish Chaudhuri & Nisvan Erkal & Lata Gangadharan, 2009. "Gender, Culture, and Corruption: Insights from an Experimental Analysis," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 663-680, January.
    24. Richard D. Mckelvey & Thomas R. Palfrey, 1996. "A Statistical Theory Of Equilibrium In Games," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 186-209, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Armand, Alex & Coutts, Alexander & Vicente, Pedro C. & Vilela, Inês, 2023. "Measuring corruption in the field using behavioral games," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 218(C).
    2. Anna Bassi & Kenneth C. Williams, 2014. "Examining Monotonicity and Saliency Using Level- k Reasoning in a Voting Game," Games, MDPI, vol. 5(1), pages 1-27, February.
    3. Cavalcanti, Francisco & Daniele, Gianmarco & Galletta, Sergio, 2018. "Popularity shocks and political selection," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 201-216.
    4. Bruno Frey, 2017. "Policy consequences of pay-for-performance and crowding-out," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 1(1), pages 55-59, February.
    5. Engel, Christoph & Zamir, Eyal, 2024. "Is transparency a blessing or a curse? An experimental horse race between accountability and extortionary corruption," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    6. Auriol, Emmanuelle & Delissaint, Diego & Fourati, Maleke & Miquel-Florensa, Josepa & Seabright, Paul, 2021. "Betting on the lord: Lotteries and religiosity in Haiti," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    7. Bosworth, Steven J. & Singer, Tania & Snower, Dennis J., 2016. "Cooperation, motivation and social balance," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 126(PB), pages 72-94.
    8. Alice Guerra & Tatyana Zhuravleva, 2022. "Do women always behave as corruption cleaners?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 191(1), pages 173-192, April.
    9. Roberto Brunetti & Matthieu Pourieux, 2026. "Representative policymakers? A behavioural experiment with French politicians," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 93(371), pages 930-961, July.
    10. Bosworth, Steven J. & Singer, Tania & Snower, Dennis J., 2016. "Cooperation, motivation and social balance," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 126(PB), pages 72-94.
    11. Gans-Morse, Jordan & Borges, Mariana & Makarin, Alexey & Mannah-Blankson, Theresa & Nickow, Andre & Zhang, Dong, 2018. "Reducing bureaucratic corruption: Interdisciplinary perspectives on what works," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 171-188.
    12. Schmidt, Robert, 2025. "Social norm uncertainty: Measurement using coordination games and behavioral relevance," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 232(C).
    13. Abbink, Klaus & Dasgupta, Utteeyo & Gangadharan, Lata & Jain, Tarun, 2014. "Letting the briber go free: An experiment on mitigating harassment bribes," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 17-28.
    14. Collier, Trevor & Cotten, Stephen & Roush, Justin, 2022. "Using pandemic behavior to test the external validity of laboratory measurements of risk aversion and guilt," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    15. Christine Exley, 2013. "Incentives for Prosocial Behavior: The Role of Reputations," Discussion Papers 12-022, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    16. Elliott Ash & W. Bentley MacLeod, 2015. "Intrinsic Motivation in Public Service: Theory and Evidence from State Supreme Courts," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 58(4).
    17. Yi, Kang-Oh, 2005. "Quantal-response equilibrium models of the ultimatum bargaining game," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 324-348, May.
    18. Fidanoski, Filip & Johnson, Timothy, 2023. "A z-Tree implementation of the Dynamic Experiments for Estimating Preferences [DEEP] method," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 38(C).
    19. Caferra, Rocco & Morone, Andrea & Pierno, Donato, 2025. "Experimental methods: Learning your own risk preferences under different risk elicitation methods," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    20. Neckermann, Susanne & Yang, Xiaolan, 2017. "Understanding the (unexpected) consequences of unexpected recognition," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 131-142.

    More about this item

    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:eee:gamebe:v:157:y:2026:i:c:p:480-495. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/622836 .

    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.