IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/pubeco/v194y2021ics0047272720301869.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic preferences and compliance in the social stress test of the COVID-19 crisis

Author

Listed:
  • Müller, Stephan
  • Rau, Holger A.

Abstract

We analyze in a survey study whether economic preferences and pre-crisis social responsibility predict social compliance to the policy regulations. Results show that economic preferences are closely related to compliance with policies fighting the crisis. Risk tolerance negatively affects citizens’ avoidance of crowds, whereas patience helps to do so and to stay home. Present-biased subjects engage in panic buying. Risk tolerance is negatively related with the fear of COVID-19 and trust positively resonates with positive media perception. Pre-crisis social responsible behavior related to fare evasion, turnout, support of vaccination is also positively related with social compliance. Our findings offer insights, which may help policy-makers and organizations to identify risk groups and regions for the allocation of scarce medical or surveillance resources, such as vaccines, masks, and law enforcement.

Suggested Citation

  • Müller, Stephan & Rau, Holger A., 2021. "Economic preferences and compliance in the social stress test of the COVID-19 crisis," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:pubeco:v:194:y:2021:i:c:s0047272720301869
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2020.104322
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272720301869
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2020.104322?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. Zhixin Dai & Fabio Galeotti & Marie Claire Villeval, 2018. "Cheating in the Lab Predicts Fraud in the Field: An Experiment in Public Transportation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(3), pages 1081-1100, March.
    2. Thomas Dohmen & Armin Falk & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde, 2012. "The Intergenerational Transmission of Risk and Trust Attitudes," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 79(2), pages 645-677.
    3. Campos-Mercade, Pol & Meier, Armando N. & Schneider, Florian H. & Wengström, Erik, 2021. "Prosociality predicts health behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    4. Thomas Dohmen & Armin Falk & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde & Jürgen Schupp & Gert G. Wagner, 2011. "Individual Risk Attitudes: Measurement, Determinants, And Behavioral Consequences," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 9(3), pages 522-550, June.
    5. Bowles, Samuel & Hwang, Sung-Ha, 2008. "Social preferences and public economics: Mechanism design when social preferences depend on incentives," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(8-9), pages 1811-1820, August.
    6. Jon Kleinberg & Jens Ludwig & Sendhil Mullainathan & Ziad Obermeyer, 2015. "Prediction Policy Problems," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(5), pages 491-495, May.
    7. Fellner, Gerlinde & Maciejovsky, Boris, 2007. "Risk attitude and market behavior: Evidence from experimental asset markets," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 338-350, June.
    8. Armin Falk & Anke Becker & Thomas Dohmen & Benjamin Enke & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde, 2018. "Global Evidence on Economic Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 133(4), pages 1645-1692.
    9. Urs Fischbacher & Franziska Föllmi-Heusi, 2013. "Lies In Disguise—An Experimental Study On Cheating," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 11(3), pages 525-547, June.
    10. Armin Falk & Anke Becker & Thomas Dohmen & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde, 2016. "The Preference Survey Module: A Validated Instrument for Measuring Risk, Time, and Social Preferences," Working Papers 2016-003, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
    11. Kirchler,Erich, 2007. "The Economic Psychology of Tax Behaviour," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521876742.
    12. Bonin, Holger & Dohmen, Thomas & Falk, Armin & Huffman, David & Sunde, Uwe, 2007. "Cross-sectional earnings risk and occupational sorting: The role of risk attitudes," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(6), pages 926-937, December.
    13. Stephen Knack & Philip Keefer, 1997. "Does Social Capital Have an Economic Payoff? A Cross-Country Investigation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 112(4), pages 1251-1288.
    14. Fouarge, Didier & Kriechel, Ben & Dohmen, Thomas, 2014. "Occupational sorting of school graduates: The role of economic preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 335-351.
    15. Urs Fischbacher & Simon Gachter, 2010. "Social Preferences, Beliefs, and the Dynamics of Free Riding in Public Goods Experiments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 541-556, March.
    16. Potters, Jan & Stoop, Jan, 2016. "Do cheaters in the lab also cheat in the field?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 26-33.
    17. Ben Gillen & Erik Snowberg & Leeat Yariv, 2019. "Experimenting with Measurement Error: Techniques with Applications to the Caltech Cohort Study," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 127(4), pages 1826-1863.
    18. Erik Snowberg & Leeat Yariv, 2018. "Testing the Waters: Behavior across Participant Pools," NBER Working Papers 24781, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Stephan Meier & Charles Sprenger, 2010. "Present-Biased Preferences and Credit Card Borrowing," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 2(1), pages 193-210, January.
    20. Bronchetti, Erin Todd & Huffman, David B. & Magenheim, Ellen, 2015. "Attention, intentions, and follow-through in preventive health behavior: Field experimental evidence on flu vaccination," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 270-291.
    21. Allingham, Michael G. & Sandmo, Agnar, 1972. "Income tax evasion: a theoretical analysis," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(3-4), pages 323-338, November.
    22. Gerber, Alan S. & Green, Donald P. & Larimer, Christopher W., 2008. "Social Pressure and Voter Turnout: Evidence from a Large-Scale Field Experiment," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 102(1), pages 33-48, February.
    23. James Andreoni & Charles Sprenger, 2012. "Estimating Time Preferences from Convex Budgets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(7), pages 3333-3356, December.
    24. Myong‐Il Kang & Shinsuke Ikeda, 2014. "Time Discounting And Smoking Behavior: Evidence From A Panel Survey," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(12), pages 1443-1464, December.
    25. Snowberg, Erik & Yariv, Leeat, 2018. "Testing the Waters: Behavior across Participant Pools," CEPR Discussion Papers 13015, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    26. Shane Frederick & George Loewenstein & Ted O'Donoghue, 2002. "Time Discounting and Time Preference: A Critical Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 40(2), pages 351-401, June.
    27. Erik Snowberg & Leeat Yariv, 2018. "Testing the Waters: Behavior across Participant Pools," CESifo Working Paper Series 7136, CESifo.
    28. Alexander W. Cappelen & Knut Nygaard & Erik Ø. Sørensen & Bertil Tungodden, 2015. "Social Preferences in the Lab: A Comparison of Students and a Representative Population," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 117(4), pages 1306-1326, October.
    29. Glenn W. Harrison & Andre Hofmeyr & Don Ross & J. Todd Swarthout, 2018. "Risk Preferences, Time Preferences, and Smoking Behavior," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 85(2), pages 313-348, October.
    30. Victor Stango & Joanne Yoong & Jonathan Zinman, 2017. "The Quest for Parsimony in Behavioral Economics: New Methods and Evidence on Three Fronts," NBER Working Papers 23057, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    31. Armin Falk & Anke Becker & Thomas Dohmen & Benjamin Enke & David B. Huffman & Uwe Sunde, 2017. "Global Evidence on Economic Preferences," NBER Working Papers 23943, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    32. Slemrod, Joel & Blumenthal, Marsha & Christian, Charles, 2001. "Taxpayer response to an increased probability of audit: evidence from a controlled experiment in Minnesota," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(3), pages 455-483, March.
    33. Masclet, David & Colombier, Nathalie & Denant-Boemont, Laurent & Lohéac, Youenn, 2009. "Group and individual risk preferences: A lottery-choice experiment with self-employed and salaried workers," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 470-484, June.
    34. Lamar Pierce & Daniel C. Snow & Andrew McAfee, 2015. "Cleaning House: The Impact of Information Technology Monitoring on Employee Theft and Productivity," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(10), pages 2299-2319, October.
    35. Sheedy, Elizabeth & Zhang, Le & Tam, Kenny Chi Ho, 2019. "Incentives and culture in risk compliance," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 1-1.
    36. Alm, James & Jackson, Betty & McKee, Michael, 1992. "Institutional Uncertainty and Taxpayer Compliance," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(4), pages 1018-1026, September.
    37. Rema Hanna & Shing-Yi Wang, 2017. "Dishonesty and Selection into Public Service: Evidence from India," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 9(3), pages 262-290, August.
    38. Bradley R. Staats & Hengchen Dai & David Hofmann & Katherine L. Milkman, 2017. "Motivating Process Compliance Through Individual Electronic Monitoring: An Empirical Examination of Hand Hygiene in Healthcare," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(5), pages 1563-1585, May.
    39. Armin Falk & Stephan Meier & Christian Zehnder, 2013. "Do Lab Experiments Misrepresent Social Preferences? The Case Of Self-Selected Student Samples," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 11(4), pages 839-852, August.
    40. Sule Alan & Seda Ertac, 2018. "Fostering Patience in the Classroom: Results from Randomized Educational Intervention," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 126(5), pages 1865-1911.
    41. Armenak Antinyan & Thomas Bassetti & Luca Corazzini & Filippo Pavesi, 2020. "Trust in the Healthcare System and COVID-19 Treatment in the Developing World. Survey and Experimental Evidence from Armenia," Working Papers 2020:10, Department of Economics, University of Venice "Ca' Foscari".
    42. Marjon Pol & Deirdre Hennessy & Braden Manns, 2017. "The role of time and risk preferences in adherence to physician advice on health behavior change," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 18(3), pages 373-386, April.
    43. Rau, Holger A., 2020. "Time preferences in decisions for others," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 395, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    44. Müller, Stephan & Rau, Holger A., 2020. "Economic preferences and compliance in the social stress test of the Corona crisis," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 391, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    45. Catherine C. Eckel & Sascha C. Füllbrunn, 2015. "Thar SHE Blows? Gender, Competition, and Bubbles in Experimental Asset Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(2), pages 906-920, February.
    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. Gianluca Grimalda & Fabrice Murtin & David Pipke & Louis Putterman & Matthias Sutter, 2022. "The politicized pandemic: Ideological polarization and the behavioral response to COVID-19," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2022_1, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    2. Shin KINOSHITA & Masayuki SATO & Takanori IDA, 2022. "Bayesian Probability Revision and Infection Prevention Behavior in Japan : A Quantitative Analysis of the First Wave of COVID-19," Discussion papers e-22-004, Graduate School of Economics , Kyoto University.
    3. Isaure Delaporte & Julia Escobar & Werner Peña, 2021. "The distributional consequences of social distancing on poverty and labour income inequality in Latin America and the Caribbean," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 34(4), pages 1385-1443, October.
    4. Maja Adena & Julian Harke, 2022. "COVID-19 and pro-sociality: How do donors respond to local pandemic severity, increased salience, and media coverage?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(3), pages 824-844, June.
    5. Karakostas, Alexandros & Kocher, Martin & Matzat, Dominik & Rau, Holger A. & Riewe, Gerhard, 2021. "The team allocator game: Allocation power in public goods games," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 419, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    6. Eroglu, Sevgin A. & Machleit, Karen A. & Neybert, Emma G., 2022. "Crowding in the time of COVID: Effects on rapport and shopping satisfaction," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    7. Clark, Andrew E. & D’Ambrosio, Conchita & Onur, Ilke & Zhu, Rong, 2022. "COVID-19 compliance behaviors of older people: The role of cognitive and non-cognitive skills," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 210(C).
    8. Daniela Costa & Nuno Fernandes & Joana Arantes & José Keating, 2022. "A dual-process approach to prosocial behavior under COVID-19 uncertainty," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(3), pages 1-18, March.
    9. Axel C. Mühlbacher & Andrew Sadler & Yvonne Jordan, 2022. "Population preferences for non-pharmaceutical interventions to control the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: trade-offs among public health, individual rights, and economics," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(9), pages 1483-1496, December.
    10. Étienne Dagorn & Martina Dattilo & Matthieu Pourieux, 2022. "Preferences matter! Political Responses to the COVID-19 and Population’s Preferences," Economics Working Paper Archive (University of Rennes 1 & University of Caen) 2022-01, Center for Research in Economics and Management (CREM), University of Rennes 1, University of Caen and CNRS.
    11. Thierry Blayac & Dimitri Dubois & Sébastien Duchêne & Phu Nguyen-Van & Bruno Ventelou & Marc Willinger, 2022. "What drives the acceptability of restrictive health policies: An experimental assessment of individual preferences for anti-COVID 19 strategies," Post-Print hal-03866196, HAL.
    12. Borau, Sylvie & Couprie, Hélène & Hopfensitz, Astrid, 2022. "The prosociality of married people: Evidence from a large multinational sample," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    13. Chun Yee Wong & Le Zhang, 2022. "To protect myself, others, or both? An investigation of preferences and the uptake of COVID-19 preventative measures in Australia," Working Papers EMS_2022_04, Research Institute, International University of Japan.
    14. Fang, Ximeng & Freyer, Timo & Ho, Chui-Yee & Chen, Zihua & Goette, Lorenz, 2022. "Prosociality predicts individual behavior and collective outcomes in the COVID-19 pandemic," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 308(C).
    15. Shusaku Sasaki & Hirofumi Kurokawa & Fumio Ohtake, 2021. "Effective but fragile? Responses to repeated nudge-based messages for preventing the spread of COVID-19 infection," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 72(3), pages 371-408, July.
    16. Jeworrek, Sabrina & Waibel, Joschka, 2021. "Alone at home: The impact of social distancing on norm-consistent behavior," IWH Discussion Papers 8/2021, Halle Institute for Economic Research (IWH).
    17. Haucap, Justus & Heldman, Christina & Rau, Holger A., 2022. "Gender and collusion," DICE Discussion Papers 380, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    18. Keser, Claudia & Rau, Holger A., 2022. "Policy Incentives and Determinants of Citizens' COVID-19 Vaccination Motives," VfS Annual Conference 2022 (Basel): Big Data in Economics 264040, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    19. Keser, Claudia & Rau, Holger A., 2022. "Policy incentives and determinants of citizens' COVID-19 vaccination motives," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 434, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    20. Inhwa Kim & Keith J. Gamble, 2022. "Too much or too little information: how unknown uncertainty fuels time inconsistency," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 1-33, February.
    21. Kergall, Pauline & Guillon, Marlène, 2022. "Lockdown support, trust and COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs: Insights from the second national lockdown in France," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(11), pages 1103-1109.
    22. Andersson, Ola & Campos-Mercade, Pol & Meier, Armando N. & Wengström, Erik, 2021. "Anticipation of COVID-19 vaccines reduces willingness to socially distance," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    23. Shachat, Jason & Walker, Matthew J. & Wei, Lijia, 2021. "How the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic impacted pro-social behaviour and individual preferences: Experimental evidence from China," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 480-494.

    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. Müller, Stephan & Rau, Holger A., 2020. "Economic preferences and compliance in the social stress test of the Corona crisis," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 391, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    2. Johannes Abeler & Armin Falk & Fabian Kosse, 2021. "Malleability of Preferences for Honesty," CESifo Working Paper Series 9033, CESifo.
    3. Bauer, Michal & Chytilová, Julie & Miguel, Edward, 2020. "Using survey questions to measure preferences: Lessons from an experimental validation in Kenya," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    4. Batrancea, Larissa M. & Kudła, Janusz & Błaszczak, Barbara & Kopyt, Mateusz, 2022. "Differences in tax evasion attitudes between students and entrepreneurs under the slippery slope framework," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 464-482.
    5. Glätzle-Rützler, Daniela & Lergetporer, Philipp & Sutter, Matthias, 2021. "Collective intertemporal decisions and heterogeneity in groups," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 131-147.
    6. Kaisa Kotakorpi & Satu Metsälampi & Topi Miettinen & Tuomas Nurminen, 2019. "The effect of reporting institutions on tax evasion:Evidence from the lab," Discussion Papers 127, Aboa Centre for Economics.
    7. Breitkopf, Laura & Chowdhury, Shyamal K. & Priyam, Shambhavi & Schildberg-Hörisch, Hannah & Sutter, Matthias, 2020. "Do economic preferences of children predict behavior?," DICE Discussion Papers 342, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    8. Jonathan Chapman & Erik Snowberg & Stephanie Wang & Colin Camerer, 2018. "Loss Attitudes in the U.S. Population: Evidence from Dynamically Optimized Sequential Experimentation (DOSE)," NBER Working Papers 25072, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Philipp Doerrenberg & Andreas Peichl, 2022. "Tax Morale and the Role of Social Norms and Reciprocity - Evidence from a Randomized Survey Experiment," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 78(1-2), pages 44-86.
    10. Brañas-Garza, Pablo & Jorrat, Diego & Espín, Antonio M. & Sanchez, Angel, 2020. "Paid and hypothetical time preferences are the same: Lab, field and online evidence," MPRA Paper 103660, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Preuss, Malte, 2021. "Intra-individual stability of two survey measures on forward-looking attitude," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 201-227.
    12. Étienne Dagorn & Martina Dattilo & Matthieu Pourieux, 2022. "Preferences matter! Political Responses to the COVID-19 and Population’s Preferences," Economics Working Paper Archive (University of Rennes 1 & University of Caen) 2022-01, Center for Research in Economics and Management (CREM), University of Rennes 1, University of Caen and CNRS.
    13. Daniela Glätzle-Rützler & Philipp Lergetporer & Matthias Sutter, 2019. "Collective intertemporal decisions and heterogeneity in groups," Working Papers 2019-10, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, University of Innsbruck.
    14. Schunk, Daniel & Wagner, Valentin, 2021. "What determines the willingness to sanction violations of newly introduced social norms: Personality traits or economic preferences? evidence from the COVID-19 crisis," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    15. Dániel Horn & Hubert János Kiss, 2020. "Time preferences and their life outcome correlates: Evidence from a representative survey," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-26, July.
    16. Abeler, Johannes & Falk, Armin & Kosse, Fabian, 2021. "Malleability of Preferences for Honesty," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 296, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    17. Tim Friehe & Markus Pannenberg, 2020. "Time preferences and political regimes: evidence from reunified Germany," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 33(1), pages 349-387, January.
    18. Sutter, Matthias & Angerer, Silvia & Glätzle-Rützler, Daniela & Lergetporer, Philipp, 2018. "Language group differences in time preferences: Evidence from primary school children in a bilingual city," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 21-34.
    19. Dohmen, Thomas, 2014. "Behavioral labor economics: Advances and future directions," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 71-85.
    20. Keser, Claudia & Rau, Holger A., 2022. "Policy incentives and determinants of citizens' COVID-19 vaccination motives," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 434, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Compliance; COVID-19; Experiment; Preferences; Social responsibility;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • H12 - Public Economics - - Structure and Scope of Government - - - Crisis Management
    • H41 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Public Goods

    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:pubeco:v:194:y:2021:i:c:s0047272720301869. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505578 .

    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/505578 .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.