IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zbw/espost/268907.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When to Not Respond in Kind? Individuals’ Expectations of the Future and Their Support for Reciprocity in Foreign Policy

Author

Listed:
  • Kiratli, Osman Sabri
  • Ertan, Sabri Arhan

Abstract

This paper investigates if individuals’ negative assessments of the future drive micro-level reluctance for international cooperation and reciprocal behavior, a core principle of multilateralism. To test our theoretical expectations, we field online survey experiments on a sample of over 3000 respondents in the US and Turkey in October–November 2020. The experimental results show that on average, individuals are fairly sensitive to target countries’ policy actions and are inclined to reciprocate when contemplating whether to increase contributions to UN or consent to bilateral trade liberalization. Yet, further analyses concur that individual inclinations to reciprocate are substantially moderated by their future expectations. Specifically, individuals who are more pessimistic about their material prospects remain fairly indifferent to the positive actions of other countries, but are more likely to penalize negative foreign policy actions by reciprocating in kind.

Suggested Citation

  • Kiratli, Osman Sabri & Ertan, Sabri Arhan, 2023. "When to Not Respond in Kind? Individuals’ Expectations of the Future and Their Support for Reciprocity in Foreign Policy," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, issue Latest Ar, pages 1-1.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:espost:268907
    DOI: 10.1007/s11109-023-09857-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/268907/1/Full-text-article-Kiratli-Ertan-When-to-Not.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11109-023-09857-y?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. Ernst Fehr & Simon Gächter, 2000. "Fairness and Retaliation: The Economics of Reciprocity," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(3), pages 159-181, Summer.
    2. Jacobs, Alan M. & Matthews, J. Scott, 2012. "Why Do Citizens Discount the Future? Public Opinion and the Timing of Policy Consequences," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 42(4), pages 903-935, October.
    3. Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, 1999. "A Theory of Fairness, Competition, and Cooperation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(3), pages 817-868.
    4. Ernst Fehr & Simon Gachter & Georg Kirchsteiger, 1997. "Reciprocity as a Contract Enforcement Device: Experimental Evidence," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(4), pages 833-860, July.
    5. Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 2001. "Domestic Policies, National Sovereignty, and International Economic Institutions," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 116(2), pages 519-562.
    6. Guisinger, Alexandra, 2009. "Determining Trade Policy: Do Voters Hold Politicians Accountable?," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 63(3), pages 533-557, July.
    7. Gary Charness & Matthew Rabin, 1999. "Social preferences: Some simple tests and a new model," Economics Working Papers 441, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, revised Jan 2000.
    8. Finger, J. Michael & Reincke, Ulrich & Castro, Adriana, 1999. "Market access bargaining in the Uruguay Round - Rigid or relaxed reciprocity?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2258, The World Bank.
    9. Martin Edwards, 2009. "Public support for the international economic organizations: Evidence from developing countries," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 4(2), pages 185-209, June.
    10. Ruggie, John Gerard, 1992. "Multilateralism: the anatomy of an institution," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(3), pages 561-598, July.
    11. Paul Stroik & D. Chakraborty & W. Ge & J. Boulter & E. Jamelske, 2019. "Effect of reciprocity on public opinion of international climate treaties: experimental evidence from the US and China," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(8), pages 959-973, September.
    12. Brutger, Ryan & Rathbun, Brian, 2021. "Fair Share? Equality and Equity in American Attitudes Toward Trade," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 75(3), pages 880-900, March.
    13. Gowa, Joanne & Mansfield, Edward D., 2004. "Alliances, Imperfect Markets, and Major-Power Trade," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 58(4), pages 775-805, October.
    14. Kobayashi, Yoshiharu & Heinrich, Tobias & Bryant, Kristin A., 2021. "Public support for development aid during the COVID-19 pandemic," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    15. Mayda, Anna Maria & Rodrik, Dani, 2005. "Why are some people (and countries) more protectionist than others?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(6), pages 1393-1430, August.
    16. Yeung, Eddy S.F. & Quek, Kai, 2022. "Relative Gains in the Shadow of a Trade War," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 76(3), pages 741-765, March.
    17. Margalit, Yotam, 2011. "Costly Jobs: Trade-related Layoffs, Government Compensation, and Voting in U.S. Elections," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 105(1), pages 166-188, February.
    18. A. Burcu Bayram & Erin R. Graham, 2017. "Financing the United Nations: Explaining variation in how donors provide funding to the UN," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 12(3), pages 421-459, September.
    19. Sara McLaughlin Mitchell & Paul R. Hensel, 2007. "International Institutions and Compliance with Agreements," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 51(4), pages 721-737, October.
    20. Cornelia Woll & Ben Clift, 2012. "Economic Patriotism: Reinventing Control Over Open Markets," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-02186557, HAL.
    21. Dang, Hai-Anh & Knack, Stephen & Rogers, F. Halsey, 2013. "International aid and financial crises in donor countries," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 232-250.
    22. Mutz, Diana C. & Kim, Eunji, 2017. "The Impact of In-group Favoritism on Trade Preferences," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 71(4), pages 827-850, October.
    23. Alan T. Peacock & Jack Wiseman, 1961. "The Growth of Public Expenditure in the United Kingdom," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number peac61-1, March.
    24. Keohane, Robert O., 1986. "Reciprocity in international relations," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 40(1), pages 1-27, January.
    25. Hiscox, Michael J., 2002. "Commerce, Coalitions, and Factor Mobility: Evidence from Congressional Votes on Trade Legislation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 96(3), pages 593-608, September.
    26. Cornelia Woll & Ben Clift, 2012. "Economic Patriotism: Reinventing Control Over Open Markets," Post-Print hal-02186557, HAL.
    27. Adam S. Chilton, 2015. "The Laws of War and Public Opinion: An Experimental Study," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 171(1), pages 181-201, March.
    28. Scharlemann, Jorn P. W. & Eckel, Catherine C. & Kacelnik, Alex & Wilson, Rick K., 2001. "The value of a smile: Game theory with a human face," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 22(5), pages 617-640, October.
    29. Heinrich, Tobias & Kobayashi, Yoshiharu & Bryant, Kristin A., 2016. "Public Opinion and Foreign Aid Cuts in Economic Crises," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 66-79.
    30. Buchan, Nancy R. & Johnson, Eric J. & Croson, Rachel T.A., 2006. "Let's get personal: An international examination of the influence of communication, culture and social distance on other regarding preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 373-398, July.
    31. Milner, Helen V. & Tingley, Dustin H., 2011. "Who Supports Global Economic Engagement? The Sources of Preferences in American Foreign Economic Policy," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 65(1), pages 37-68, January.
    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. Erik O. Kimbrough & Vernon L. Smith & Bart J. Wilson, 2008. "Historical Property Rights, Sociality, and the Emergence of Impersonal Exchange in Long-Distance Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(3), pages 1009-1039, June.
    2. Bergh, Andreas, 2008. "A critical note on the theory of inequity aversion," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 1789-1796, October.
    3. Xiao, Erte & Houser, Daniel, 2009. "Avoiding the sharp tongue: Anticipated written messages promote fair economic exchange," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 393-404, June.
    4. Chaudhuri, Ananish & Sopher, Barry & Strand, Paul, 2002. "Cooperation in social dilemmas, trust and reciprocity," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 231-249, April.
    5. Grossmann, Volker, 2002. "Is it rational to internalize the personal norm that one should reciprocate?," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 27-48, February.
    6. Cox, James C. & Friedman, Daniel & Gjerstad, Steven, 2007. "A tractable model of reciprocity and fairness," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 17-45, April.
    7. Ernst Fehr & Simon Gächter, 2000. "Fairness and Retaliation: The Economics of Reciprocity," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(3), pages 159-181, Summer.
    8. Fehr, Ernst & Falk, Armin, 2002. "Psychological foundations of incentives," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(4-5), pages 687-724, May.
    9. Giovanni Facchini & Tommaso Frattini & Cora Signorotto, 2013. "Mind What Your Voters Read: Media Exposure and International Economic Policy Making," Development Working Papers 358, Centro Studi Luca d'Agliano, University of Milano.
    10. Krupka, Erin & Weber, Roberto A., 2009. "The focusing and informational effects of norms on pro-social behavior," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 307-320, June.
    11. David A. Steinberg & Yeling Tan, 2023. "Public responses to foreign protectionism: Evidence from the US-China trade war," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 145-167, January.
    12. Jean-Michel Oudot & Claude Ménard, 2010. "Opportunisme ou équité ? Le cas des contrats d’approvisionnement de défense," Revue Française d'Économie, Programme National Persée, vol. 24(3), pages 195-226.
    13. Linfeng Chen, 2021. "Reciprocity Game," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(1), pages 131-141, January.
    14. Gary Bolton & Peter Werner, 2016. "The influence of potential on wages and effort," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 19(3), pages 535-561, September.
    15. Christian Thoeni & Simon Gaechter, 2011. "Peer Effects and Social Preferences in Voluntary Cooperation," Discussion Papers 2011-09, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    16. Simon Gächter & Daniele Nosenzo & Martin Sefton, 2012. "The Impact of Social Comparisons on Reciprocity," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 114(4), pages 1346-1367, December.
    17. Irlenbusch, Bernd & Sliwka, Dirk, 2003. "Transparency and Reciprocal Behavior," IZA Discussion Papers 887, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    18. John A. List, 2006. "The Behavioralist Meets the Market: Measuring Social Preferences and Reputation Effects in Actual Transactions," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 114(1), pages 1-37, February.
    19. Stanca, Luca & Bruni, Luigino & Corazzini, Luca, 2009. "Testing theories of reciprocity: Do motivations matter?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 233-245, August.
    20. Dufwenberg, Martin & Kirchsteiger, Georg, 2004. "A theory of sequential reciprocity," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 268-298, May.

    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:zbw:espost:268907. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zbwkide.html .

    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.