IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/beb/wpbels/201802.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Labor-Leisure Trade-off in the Laboratory

Author

Listed:
  • Deniz Nebioglu

    (Bilgi Economics Lab of Istanbul (BELIS)
    Istanbul Bilgi University)

  • Ay�a Ebru Giritligil

    (Murat Sertel Center for Advanced Economic Studies
    Istanbul Bilgi University)

Abstract

This paper presents the results of a series of experiments which try to test the behavioral foundations of GHH preferences using the Ramsey framework in a controlled laboratory setting. The main objective is to elicit subjects� innate preferences for income and leisure through an experimental design with real effort. To this end, we ran two experiments and we observed that subjects do not perceive leisure in the lab as real leisure, and hence they choose to work as much as they can even if the marginal revenue from extra work is very low. This result points out the methodological difficulty of creating labor/leisure choice environment in a laboratory setting. We concluded that an experiment which aims to investigate the effect of changed incentives on effort provision in a neoclassical labor supply model should not be designed as an individual decision making experiment but rather as a market experiment.

Suggested Citation

  • Deniz Nebioglu & Ay�a Ebru Giritligil, 2018. "Labor-Leisure Trade-off in the Laboratory," BELIS Working Papers 2018-02, BELIS, Istanbul Bilgi University.
  • Handle: RePEc:beb:wpbels:201802
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://repeck.bilgi.org.tr/RePEc/beb/wpbels/BelisWP_BELIS05.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2018
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Blumkin, Tomer & Ruffle, Bradley J. & Ganun, Yosef, 2012. "Are income and consumption taxes ever really equivalent? Evidence from a real-effort experiment with real goods," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(6), pages 1200-1219.
    2. John H. Kagel & Alvin E. Roth, 2016. "The Handbook of Experimental Economics, Volume 2," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, volume 2, number 10874.
    3. Uri Gneezy & Aldo Rustichini, 2000. "Pay Enough or Don't Pay at All," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 115(3), pages 791-810.
    4. Johannes Abeler & Armin Falk & Lorenz Goette & David Huffman, 2011. "Reference Points and Effort Provision," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(2), pages 470-492, April.
    5. Lévy-Garboua, Louis & Masclet, David & Montmarquette, Claude, 2009. "A behavioral Laffer curve: Emergence of a social norm of fairness in a real effort experiment," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 147-161, April.
    6. Ben Greiner, 2015. "Subject pool recruitment procedures: organizing experiments with ORSEE," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 1(1), pages 114-125, July.
    7. Camerer, Colin F & Hogarth, Robin M, 1999. "The Effects of Financial Incentives in Experiments: A Review and Capital-Labor-Production Framework," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 19(1-3), pages 7-42, December.
    8. Noussair, C.N. & Pfajfar, D. & Zsiros, J., 2011. "Frictions, Persistence, and Central Bank Policy in an Experimental Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium Economy," Discussion Paper 2011-030, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    9. Kenneth Matheny & Charles Noussair, 2000. "An experimental study of decisions in dynamic optimization problems," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 15(2), pages 389-419.
    10. Brice Corgnet & Roberto Hernán-González & Eric Schniter, 2015. "Why real leisure really matters: incentive effects on real effort in the laboratory," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(2), pages 284-301, June.
    11. Dickinson, David L, 1999. "An Experimental Examination of Labor Supply and Work Intensities," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 17(4), pages 638-670, October.
    12. Bruggen, Alexander & Strobel, Martin, 2007. "Real effort versus chosen effort in experiments," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 96(2), pages 232-236, August.
    13. Greiner, Ben & Ockenfels, Axel & Werner, Peter, 2011. "Wage transparency and performance: A real-effort experiment," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 111(3), pages 236-238, June.
    14. Urs Fischbacher, 2007. "z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(2), pages 171-178, June.
    15. Vivian Lei & Charles N. Noussair, 2002. "An Experimental Test of an Optimal Growth Model," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(3), pages 549-570, June.
    16. Lévy-Garboua, Louis & Masclet, David & Montmarquette, Claude, 2009. "A behavioral Laffer curve: Emergence of a social norm of fairness in a real effort experiment," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 147-161, April.
    17. Dan Ariely & Uri Gneezy & George Loewenstein & Nina Mazar, 2009. "Large Stakes and Big Mistakes," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 76(2), pages 451-469.
    18. Greenwood, Jeremy & Hercowitz, Zvi & Huffman, Gregory W, 1988. "Investment, Capacity Utilization, and the Real Business Cycle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(3), pages 402-417, June.
    19. John H. Kagel & Alvin E. Roth, 2016. "Macroeconomics: A Survey of Laboratory Research," Introductory Chapters, in: The Handbook of Experimental Economics, Volume 2, Princeton University Press.
    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. Deniz Nebioglu & Ayca Ebru Giritligil, 2018. "Wealth Effects and Labor Supply: An Experimental Study," BELIS Working Papers 2018-01, BELIS, Istanbul Bilgi University.
    2. Erkal, Nisvan & Gangadharan, Lata & Koh, Boon Han, 2018. "Monetary and non-monetary incentives in real-effort tournaments," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 528-545.
    3. Simon Gächter & Lingbo Huang & Martin Sefton, 2016. "Combining “real effort” with induced effort costs: the ball-catching task," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 19(4), pages 687-712, December.
    4. Emanuela Lezzi & Piers Fleming & Daniel John Zizzo, 2015. "Does it matter which effort task you use? A comparison of four effort tasks when agents compete for a prize," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Behavioural and Experimental Social Science (CBESS) 15-05, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    5. Volker Benndorf & Holger A. Rau & Christian Sölch, 2019. "Gender Differences In Motivational Crowding Out Of Work Performance," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 57(1), pages 206-226, January.
    6. Charness, Gary & Gneezy, Uri & Henderson, Austin, 2018. "Experimental methods: Measuring effort in economics experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 74-87.
    7. Gill, David & Prowse, Victoria, 2019. "Measuring costly effort using the slider task," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 1-9.
    8. Sausgruber, Rupert & Sonntag, Axel & Tyran, Jean-Robert, 2021. "Disincentives from redistribution: evidence on a dividend of democracy," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    9. Simon Gächter & Lingbo Huang & Martin Sefton, 2018. "Disappointment Aversion And Social Comparisons In A Real‐Effort Competition," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 56(3), pages 1512-1525, July.
    10. Sebastian J. Goerg & Sebastian Kube & Jonas Radbruch, 2019. "The Effectiveness of Incentive Schemes in the Presence of Implicit Effort Costs," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(9), pages 4063-4078, September.
    11. Simone Haeckl & Rupert Sausgruber & Jean-Robert Tyran, 2018. "Work Motivation and Teams," Discussion Papers 18-08, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.
    12. Thomas Meissner, 2016. "Intertemporal consumption and debt aversion: an experimental study," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 19(2), pages 281-298, June.
    13. Carpenter, Jeffrey & Matthews, Peter Hans & Tabb, Benjamin, 2016. "Progressive taxation in a tournament economy," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 64-72.
    14. Kenju Kamei & Thomas Markussen, 2023. "Free Riding and Workplace Democracy—Heterogeneous Task Preferences and Sorting," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(7), pages 3884-3904, July.
    15. Luhan, Wolfgang J. & Scharler, Johann, 2013. "Monetary Policy, Inflation Illusion and the Taylor Principle – An Experimental Study," Ruhr Economic Papers 402, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    16. Jochen Hundsdoerfer & Eva Matthaei, 2022. "Gender Discriminatory Taxes, Fairness Perception, and Labor Supply," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 78(1-2), pages 156-207.
    17. Aleksandr Alekseev, 2022. "Give me a challenge or give me a raise," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(1), pages 170-202, February.
    18. Haeckl, Simone, 2022. "Image concerns in ex-ante self-assessments–Gender differences and behavioral consequences," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    19. Johannes Becker & Jonas Fooken & Melanie Steinhoff, 2019. "Behavioral Effects of Withholding Taxes on Labor Supply," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 121(4), pages 1417-1440, October.
    20. Werner, Peter, 2023. "Wage negotiations and strategic responses to transparency," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 209(C), pages 161-175.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:beb:wpbels:201802. 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: Fatih Mehmet Senyurt (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/bebiltr.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.