IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/soecon/v78y2011i1p53-62.html

Trust in Second Life

Author

Listed:
  • John Duffy

Abstract

In this article, some issues are raised with regard to conducting economic decision‐making experiments in virtual worlds. I make suggestions for addressing these issues. The issues are illustrated via a visit to an experimental laboratory in Second Life.

Suggested Citation

  • John Duffy, 2011. "Trust in Second Life," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 78(1), pages 53-62, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:soecon:v:78:y:2011:i:1:p:53-62
    DOI: 10.4284/0038-4038-78.1.53
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.4284/0038-4038-78.1.53
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.4284/0038-4038-78.1.53?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marina Fiedler, 2009. "Cooperation in Virtual Worlds," Schmalenbach Business Review (sbr), LMU Munich School of Management, vol. 61(2), pages 173-194, April.
    2. Anderhub, Vital & Muller, Rudolf & Schmidt, Carsten, 2001. "Design and evaluation of an economic experiment via the Internet," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 227-247, October.
    3. Andreas Nicklisch & Tobias Salz, 2008. "Reciprocity and status in a virtual field experiment," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Behavioral Economics 2008_37, Max Planck Institute for Behavioral Economics.
    4. Glenn W. Harrison & John A. List, 2004. "Field Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(4), pages 1009-1055, December.
    5. Gary Charness & Martin Dufwenberg, 2006. "Promises and Partnership," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 74(6), pages 1579-1601, November.
    6. Gabriele Paolacci & Jesse Chandler & Panagiotis G. Ipeirotis, 2010. "Running experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 5(5), pages 411-419, August.
    7. Fiedler, Marina & Haruvy, Ernan, 2009. "The lab versus the virtual lab and virtual field--An experimental investigation of trust games with communication," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 716-724, November.
    8. Daniel Zizzo, 2010. "Experimenter demand effects in economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 13(1), pages 75-98, March.
    9. Chesney, Thomas & Chuah, Swee-Hoon & Hoffmann, Robert, 2009. "Virtual world experimentation: An exploratory study," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 618-635, October.
    10. Charness, Gary & Dufwenberg, Martin, 2003. "Promises & Partnership," Research Papers in Economics 2003:3, Stockholm University, Department of Economics.
    11. Stephen Atlas & Louis Putterman, 2011. "Trust among the Avatars: A Virtual World Experiment, with and without Textual and Visual Cues," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 78(1), pages 63-86, July.
    12. Guala,Francesco, 2005. "The Methodology of Experimental Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521618618, June.
    13. Steven D. Levitt & John A. List, 2007. "What Do Laboratory Experiments Measuring Social Preferences Reveal About the Real World?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 21(2), pages 153-174, Spring.
    14. Berg Joyce & Dickhaut John & McCabe Kevin, 1995. "Trust, Reciprocity, and Social History," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 122-142, 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. repec:usi:labsit:049 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Caterina Cruciani & Carlo Romano Marcello Alessandro Santagiustina & Costanza Sartoris & Massimo Warglien, 2024. "Survey on experiments about trust and collaborative vs conflictual language," Sciences Po Economics Publications (main) hal-04922031, HAL.
    3. Kaloyana Naneva, 2024. "Can We 'Solve' Anonymity in Economic Experiments? Virtual Humans in High-Immersive Environments as a Method of Identification," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 8(S1), pages 33-39, December.

    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. Fiedler, Marina & Haruvy, Ernan, 2009. "The lab versus the virtual lab and virtual field--An experimental investigation of trust games with communication," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 716-724, November.
    2. repec:usi:labsit:049 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Innocenti, Alessandro, 2017. "Virtual reality experiments in economics," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 71-77.
    4. Casoria, Fortuna & Riedl, Arno & Werner, Peter, 2020. "Behavioral Aspects of Communication in Organizations," IZA Discussion Papers 13005, IZA Network @ LISER.
    5. Kaloyana Naneva, 2024. "Can We 'Solve' Anonymity in Economic Experiments? Virtual Humans in High-Immersive Environments as a Method of Identification," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 8(S1), pages 33-39, December.
    6. Baethge, Caroline, 2016. "Performance in the beauty contest: How strategic discussion enhances team reasoning," Passauer Diskussionspapiere, Betriebswirtschaftliche Reihe B-17-16, University of Passau, Faculty of Business and Economics.
    7. Barmettler, Franziska & Fehr, Ernst & Zehnder, Christian, 2012. "Big experimenter is watching you! Anonymity and prosocial behavior in the laboratory," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 17-34.
    8. Sofianos, Andis, 2022. "Self-reported & revealed trust: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    9. Servátka, Maroš & Tucker, Steven & Vadovič, Radovan, 2011. "Words speak louder than money," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 700-709.
    10. Daniel Houser & John List & Marco Piovesan & Anya Samek & Joachim Winter, 2015. "On the Origins of Dishonesty: from Parents to Children," Artefactual Field Experiments 00449, The Field Experiments Website.
    11. Carl Mildenberger, 2013. "The constitutional political economy of virtual worlds," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 239-264, September.
    12. Luo, Jun & Wang, Xinxin, 2020. "Hukou identity and trust—Evidence from a framed field experiment in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    13. 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.
    14. Yadi Yang, 2021. "A Survey Of The Hold‐Up Problem In The Experimental Economics Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(1), pages 227-249, February.
    15. Pfaff, Alexander & Vélez, Maria Alejandra, 2012. "Efficiency and equity in negotiated resource transfers: Contributions and limitations of trust with limited contracts," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 55-63.
    16. Anna Lou Abatayo & John Lynham & Katerina Sherstyuk, 2018. "Facebook-to-Facebook: online communication and economic cooperation," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(11), pages 762-767, June.
    17. Uwe Dulleck & Jonas Fooken & Yumei He, 2012. "Public Policy and Individual Labor Market Discrimination: An Artefactual Field Experiment in China," QuBE Working Papers 002, QUT Business School.
    18. Hoffman, Mitchell & Morgan, John, 2015. "Who's naughty? Who's nice? Experiments on whether pro-social workers are selected out of cutthroat business environments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 173-187.
    19. Hans-Theo Normann & Till Requate & Israel Waichman, 2014. "Do short-term laboratory experiments provide valid descriptions of long-term economic interactions? A study of Cournot markets," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 17(3), pages 371-390, September.
    20. Matteo M. Galizzi & Daniel Navarro-Martinez, 2019. "On the External Validity of Social Preference Games: A Systematic Lab-Field Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(3), pages 976-1002, March.
    21. Antonio A. Arechar & Simon Gächter & Lucas Molleman, 2018. "Conducting interactive experiments online," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 21(1), pages 99-131, March.

    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:wly:soecon:v:78:y:2011:i:1:p:53-62. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)2325-8012 .

    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.