IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jgames/v13y2022i6p79-d980599.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Experimental Investigation of Trusting Behaviour

Author

Listed:
  • Clelia Mazzoni

    (Department of Economics, Università degli Studi della Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli”, Viale Abramo Lincoln, 5, 81100 Caserta, Italy)

  • Patrizia Sbriglia

    (Department of Economics, Università degli Studi della Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli”, Viale Abramo Lincoln, 5, 81100 Caserta, Italy)

Abstract

In this paper, we present the results of an experiment conducted in Italy on trusting behaviour. Our subjects participated in a trust game and filled in a questionnaire on trust and trustworthiness based on the attitudinal questions reported in the European Value Survey. The aims of the research are twofold. Firstly, using the experimental dataset, we construct two measures of trustworthiness among all recipients in the experiment, one based on the questionnaires’ answers and another based on the strategy method. We then compare the ex-ante behavioural decision to trust (before participants are allocated to a group) with the ex-post decision to trust (after participants are allocated to a group and trustors are informed of the level of trustworthiness of all the recipients who have been randomly allocated to each group). Our main finding is that trust strongly varies once the information is disclosed to trustors. The effect on trust is greater when the strategy method is used. Secondly, we compare the behavioural measure of trust with the attitudinal measures of trust and trustworthiness and find that there is only a weak correlation between the two measures, thus confirming, for the Italian case, similar findings in country-based studies on trust.

Suggested Citation

  • Clelia Mazzoni & Patrizia Sbriglia, 2022. "An Experimental Investigation of Trusting Behaviour," Games, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-11, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jgames:v:13:y:2022:i:6:p:79-:d:980599
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4336/13/6/79/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4336/13/6/79/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Miguel A. Costa-Gomes & Georg Weizsäcker, 2008. "Stated Beliefs and Play in Normal-Form Games," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 75(3), pages 729-762.
    2. Ernst Fehr, 2009. "On The Economics and Biology of Trust," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 7(2-3), pages 235-266, 04-05.
    3. Arnstein Aassve & Pierluigi Conzo & Francesco Mattioli, 2021. "Was Banfield right? New insights from a nationwide laboratory experiment," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(5), pages 1029-1064, November.
    4. Daniela Di Cagno & Werner Güth & Marcello Puca & Patrizia Sbriglia, 2018. "Intention-based Social Influence in Sharing Experiments," Working Papers CESARE 2/2018, Dipartimento di Economia e Finanza, LUISS Guido Carli.
    5. Berg Joyce & Dickhaut John & McCabe Kevin, 1995. "Trust, Reciprocity, and Social History," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 122-142, July.
    6. Luigi Mittone & Matteo Ploner, 2011. "Peer pressure, social spillovers, and reciprocity: an experimental analysis," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 14(2), pages 203-222, May.
    7. Maria Bigoni & Stefania Bortolotti & Marco Casari & Diego Gambetta & Francesca Pancotto, 2016. "Amoral Familism, Social Capital, or Trust? The Behavioural Foundations of the Italian North–South Divide," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 126(594), pages 1318-1341, August.
    8. Federica Alberti & Anna Conte & Daniela T. Di Cagno & Emanuela Sciubba, 2020. "How do we choose whom to trust? The effect of social networks on trust," Working Papers in Economics & Finance 2020-02, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth Business School, Economics and Finance Subject Group.
    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. Frank Krueger, 2023. "A Yin and Yang Perspective on the Trust Game: Trust and Reciprocity," Games, MDPI, vol. 14(2), pages 1-4, March.

    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. Chen Li & Uyanga Turmunkh & Peter P. Wakker, 2019. "Trust as a decision under ambiguity," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(1), pages 51-75, March.
    2. Arnstein Aassve & Pierluigi Conzo & Francesco Mattioli, 2021. "Was Banfield right? New insights from a nationwide laboratory experiment," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(5), pages 1029-1064, November.
    3. Blanco, Mariana & Engelmann, Dirk & Koch, Alexander K. & Normann, Hans-Theo, 2014. "Preferences and beliefs in a sequential social dilemma: a within-subjects analysis," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 122-135.
    4. Anderlini, Luca & Terlizzese, Daniele, 2017. "Equilibrium trust," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 624-644.
    5. Diego Marino Fages, 2023. "Migration and trust: Evidence on assimilation from internal migrants," Discussion Papers 2023-08, Nottingham Interdisciplinary Centre for Economic and Political Research (NICEP).
    6. Mario A. Maggioni & Domenico Rossignoli & Simona Beretta & Sara Balestri, 2017. "Trust behind bars: a longitudinal study of inmates? prosocial preferences," DISEIS - Quaderni del Dipartimento di Economia internazionale, delle istituzioni e dello sviluppo dis1701, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Dipartimento di Economia internazionale, delle istituzioni e dello sviluppo (DISEIS).
    7. Anke Becker & Thomas Deckers & Thomas Dohmen & Armin Falk & Fabian Kosse, 2012. "The Relationship Between Economic Preferences and Psychological Personality Measures," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 4(1), pages 453-478, July.
    8. Breuer, Janice Boucher & McDermott, John, 2009. "Trustworthiness and economic performance," MPRA Paper 16777, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Zhe Zhang & Louis Putterman & Xu Zhang, 2018. "Trust and Cooperation at a Confluence of Worlds: An Experiment in Xinjiang, China," Working Papers 2018-4, Brown University, Department of Economics.
    10. Omar Al-Ubaydli & Daniel Houser & John Nye & Maria Pia Paganelli & Xiaofei Sophia Pan, 2013. "The Causal Effect of Market Priming on Trust: An Experimental Investigation Using Randomized Control," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(3), pages 1-8, March.
    11. Antoci, Angelo & Bonelli, Laura & Paglieri, Fabio & Reggiani, Tommaso & Sabatini, Fabio, 2019. "Civility and trust in social media," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 83-99.
    12. Martin G. Kocher, 2015. "How Trust in Social Dilemmas Evolves with Age," CESifo Working Paper Series 5447, CESifo.
    13. Guiso, Luigi & Zingales, Luigi & Sapienza, Paola, 2010. "Civic Capital as the Missing Link," CEPR Discussion Papers 7757, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    14. Sofianos, Andis, 2022. "Self-reported & revealed trust: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    15. Zubair, Maria & Khanum, Ayesha & Nasir, Marjan, 2018. "Transfer Of Behavioral Traits From Parents To Children: An Experimental Approach," MPRA Paper 92121, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Bogliacino, Francesco & Codagnone, Cristiano, 2021. "Microfoundations, behaviour, and evolution: Evidence from experiments," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 372-385.
    17. Aoyagi, Keitaro & Sawada, Yasuyuki & Shoji, Masahiro, 2022. "Irrigation infrastructure and trust: Evidence from natural and lab-in-the-field experiments in rural communities," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    18. Binzel, Christine & Fehr, Dietmar, 2013. "Social distance and trust: Experimental evidence from a slum in Cairo," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 99-106.
    19. Michal Bauer & Nathan Fiala & Ian Levely, 2018. "Trusting Former Rebels: An Experimental Approach to Understanding Reintegration after Civil War," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 128(613), pages 1786-1819, August.
    20. Francesco Bogliacino & Gianluca Grimalda & Laura Jiménez & Daniel Reyes Galvis & Cristiano Codagnone, 2022. "Trust and trustworthiness after a land restitution program: lab-in-the-field evidence from Colombia," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 135-161, June.

    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:gam:jgames:v:13:y:2022:i:6:p:79-:d:980599. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.