IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/poleco/v40y2015ipbp387-390.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Of morals, markets and mice: Be careful drawing policy conclusions from experimental findings!

Author

Listed:
  • Breyer, Friedrich
  • Weimann, Joachim

Abstract

Sometimes experimentalists draw far-reaching policy conclusions from their findings. However, this is dangerous if there is ambiguity with respect to the right interpretation of the results. A good example for this danger is the well-known study by Falk and Szech (Science, 2013), who conclude that “markets erode moral values”. If this were true, economists, who have emphasized the efficiency enhancing effects of markets for centuries, would have to reconsider their judgments fundamentally. In this note we demonstrate that the claim made by Falk and Szech is unfounded for at least four reasons and that their experimental results can be (and should be) interpreted, if anything, in the opposite way.

Suggested Citation

  • Breyer, Friedrich & Weimann, Joachim, 2015. "Of morals, markets and mice: Be careful drawing policy conclusions from experimental findings!," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 40(PB), pages 387-390.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:poleco:v:40:y:2015:i:pb:p:387-390
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2015.06.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0176268015000622
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2015.06.003?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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Myerson, Roger B. & Satterthwaite, Mark A., 1983. "Efficient mechanisms for bilateral trading," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 265-281, April.
    2. 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.
    3. Martin G. Kocher & Matthias Sutter, 2005. "The Decision Maker Matters: Individual Versus Group Behaviour in Experimental Beauty-Contest Games," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 115(500), pages 200-223, January.
    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. Matthias Sutter & Jürgen Huber & Michael Kirchler & Matthias Stefan & Markus Walzl, 2020. "Where to look for the morals in markets?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(1), pages 30-52, March.
    2. Engelmann, Dirk & Friedrichsen, Jana & Kübler, Dorothea, 2018. "Fairness in Markets and Market Experiments," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 64, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    3. Bartling, Björn & Özdemir, Yagiz, 2023. "The limits to moral erosion in markets: Social norms and the replacement excuse," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 143-160.
    4. Bartling, Björn & Grieder, Manuel & Zehnder, Christian, 2017. "Competitive pricing reduces wasteful counterproductive behaviors," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 34-47.
    5. Bartling, Björn & Fehr, Ernst & Özdemir, Yagiz, 2023. "Does Market Interaction Erode Moral Values?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 105(1), pages 226-235.
    6. Gehrlein, Jonas & Crede, Ann-Kathrin & Adrian, Nana, 2020. "The impact of markets on moral reasoning: Evidence from an online experiment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    7. Greiff, Matthias & Rusch, Hannes, 2022. "Sharing responsibility for the good," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    8. Undral Byambadalai & Ching-to Albert Ma & Daniel Wiesen, 2019. "Changing Preferences: An Experiment and Estimation of Market-Incentive E§ects on Altruism," Boston University - Department of Economics - Working Papers Series WP2019-11, Boston University - Department of Economics.
    9. Yew-Kwang NG, 2016. "Extending Economic Analysis to Analyze Policy Issues More Broadly," Economic Growth Centre Working Paper Series 1609, Nanyang Technological University, School of Social Sciences, Economic Growth Centre.

    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. Friedrich Breyer & Joachim Weimann, 2014. "Of Morals, Markets and Mice: A Comment on Falk and Szech," CESifo Working Paper Series 4745, CESifo.
    2. Wolfgang Luhan & Martin Kocher & Matthias Sutter, 2009. "Group polarization in the team dictator game reconsidered," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 12(1), pages 26-41, March.
    3. Kai A. Konrad & Florian Morath & Wieland Müller, 2014. "Taxation and Market Power," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 47(1), pages 173-202, February.
    4. Parco, James E. & Murphy, Ryan O., 2013. "Resistance to truthful revelation in bargaining: Persistent bid shading and the play of dominated strategies," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 154-170.
    5. Hoffmann, Sönke & Mihm, Benedikt & Weimann, Joachim, 2015. "To commit or not to commit? An experimental investigation of pre-commitments in bargaining situations with asymmetric information," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 95-105.
    6. Kjell Hausken, 1997. "Game-theoretic and Behavioral Negotiation Theory," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 6(6), pages 511-528, December.
    7. Feicht, Robert & Grimm, Veronika & Rau, Holger A. & Stephan, Gesine, 2017. "On the impact of quotas and decision rules in collective bargaining," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 175-192.
    8. Feicht, Robert & Grimm, Veronika & Rau, Holger A. & Stephan, Gesine, 2015. "On the Impact of Quotas and Decision Rules in Ultimatum Collective Bargaining," IZA Discussion Papers 9506, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Jyotishka Ray & Syam Menon & Vijay Mookerjee, 2020. "Bargaining over Data: When Does Making the Buyer More Informed Help?," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(1), pages 1-15, March.
    10. Konrad, Kai A. & Morath, Florian, 2016. "Bargaining with incomplete information: Evolutionary stability in finite populations," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 118-131.
    11. Tetsuo Yamamori & Kazuyuki Iwata, 2019. "Endogenous Social Preferences in Bargaining and Contract Enforcement," Working Papers e134, Tokyo Center for Economic Research.
    12. He, Haoran & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2017. "Are group members less inequality averse than individual decision makers?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 111-124.
    13. Sönke Hoffmann & Benedikt Mihm & Joachim Weimann, 2014. "To Commit or not to Commit? An Experimental Investigation of Pre-Commitments in Bargaining Situations with Asymmetric Information," CESifo Working Paper Series 4835, CESifo.
    14. Kugler, Tamar & Kausel, E.E. & Kocher, Martin G., 2012. "Are groups more rational than individuals? A review of interactive decision making in groups," Munich Reprints in Economics 18215, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
    15. Bierbrauer, Felix & Ockenfels, Axel & Pollak, Andreas & Rückert, Désirée, 2017. "Robust mechanism design and social preferences," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 59-80.
    16. Bhattacharya, Haimanti & Dugar, Subhasish, 2023. "Undervaluation versus unaffordability as negotiation tactics: Evidence from a field experiment," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    17. David J. Cooper & Krista Saral & Marie Claire Villeval, 2021. "Why Join a Team?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(11), pages 6980-6997, November.
    18. Laurent Lamy, 2013. "“Upping the ante”: how to design efficient auctions with entry?," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 44(2), pages 194-214, June.
    19. Robison, Lindon J. & Hanson, Steven D., 1995. "Social Capital and Economic Cooperation," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(1), pages 43-58, July.
    20. Anne Corcos & Yorgos Rizopoulos, 2011. "Is prosocial behavior egocentric? The “invisible hand” of emotions," Post-Print halshs-01968213, HAL.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Erosion of morals; Market ethics; Double auction;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D01 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Microeconomic Behavior: Underlying Principles
    • D03 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Behavioral Microeconomics: Underlying Principles
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement

    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:poleco:v:40:y:2015:i:pb:p:387-390. 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/505544 .

    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.