IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bro/econwp/2012-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An Uninterpreted Spatial Version of the Trust Game: Evidence of Reciprocity without Suggestive Words, Evidence of Iterated Dominance Self-Taught

Author

Abstract

In this working paper we report on two trust games: a BDM-like game which is interpreted through its use of the possibly suggestive words ìshow up fee,î ìsends,î ìtripled,î ìsend backî; and an uninterpreted spatial game that does not use these words suggestive or not. In the spatial game we found a considerable amount of reciprocity, which implies the words are not necessary for reciprocity. For further comparison we designed the two games to have a correspondence relation (the relation extends to the original BDM trust game). We focused on two ìvariablesî ñ interpreted or uninterpreted and spatial or word-based. We also designed ìconstantsî which were identical or near identical in the two games. We did this to reduce confounding in statistical comparisons. We found the frequency of reciprocity in the spatial game, without the suggestive words, was about the same as the frequency of reciprocity in the BDM-like game, with the suggestive words. We found iterated dominance in the spatial game was 5.5 times higher than in the BDM-like game. And we found sending the full endowment was significantly more frequent in the BDM-like game than in the spatial game.

Suggested Citation

  • Talbot Page & Louis Putterman, 2012. "An Uninterpreted Spatial Version of the Trust Game: Evidence of Reciprocity without Suggestive Words, Evidence of Iterated Dominance Self-Taught," Working Papers 2012-1, Brown University, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:bro:econwp:2012-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://economics.brown.edu/sites/g/files/dprerj726/files/papers/2012-1_paper.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael Kosfeld & Markus Heinrichs & Paul J. Zak & Urs Fischbacher & Ernst Fehr, 2005. "Oxytocin increases trust in humans," Nature, Nature, vol. 435(7042), pages 673-676, June.
    2. 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)

    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. Anne Corcos & François Pannequin & Sacha Bourgeois-Gironde, 2012. "Aversions to Trust," Recherches économiques de Louvain, De Boeck Université, vol. 78(3), pages 115-134.
    2. Daniel Houser & Daniel Schunk & Joachim Winter, 2006. "Trust Games Measure Trust," MEA discussion paper series 06112, Munich Center for the Economics of Aging (MEA) at the Max Planck Institute for Social Law and Social Policy.
    3. Schniter, E. & Shields, T.W. & Sznycer, D., 2020. "Trust in humans and robots: Economically similar but emotionally different," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    4. Giovanni Bartolomeo & Stefano Papa, 2016. "Does collective meditation foster trust and trustworthiness in an investment game?," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 63(4), pages 379-392, December.
    5. Sofianos, Andis, 2022. "Self-reported & revealed trust: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    6. 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).
    7. Erik O. Kimbrough & Alexander Vostroknutov, 2016. "Norms Make Preferences Social," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 14(3), pages 608-638, June.
    8. Aimone, Jason A. & Houser, Daniel, 2013. "Harnessing the benefits of betrayal aversion," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 1-8.
    9. Lönnqvist, Jan-Erik & Verkasalo, Markku & Walkowitz, Gari & Wichardt, Philipp C., 2015. "Measuring individual risk attitudes in the lab: Task or ask? An empirical comparison," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 254-266.
    10. Coren L Apicella & David Cesarini & Magnus Johannesson & Christopher T Dawes & Paul Lichtenstein & Björn Wallace & Jonathan Beauchamp & Lars Westberg, 2010. "No Association between Oxytocin Receptor (OXTR) Gene Polymorphisms and Experimentally Elicited Social Preferences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(6), pages 1-8, June.
    11. Paul Rauwolf & Joanna J. Bryson, 2018. "Expectations of Fairness and Trust Co-Evolve in Environments of Partial Information," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 8(4), pages 891-917, December.
    12. Thomas Buser, 2011. "Hormones and Social Preferences," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 11-046/3, Tinbergen Institute.
    13. Songfa Zhong & Mikhail Monakhov & Helen P Mok & Terry Tong & Poh San Lai & Soo Hong Chew & Richard P Ebstein, 2012. "U-Shaped Relation between Plasma Oxytocin Levels and Behavior in the Trust Game," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(12), pages 1-9, December.
    14. Güth, Werner & Mugera, Harriet & Musau, Andrew & Ploner, Matteo, 2014. "Deterministic versus probabilistic consequences of trust and trustworthiness: An experimental investigation," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 28-40.
    15. Algan, Yann & Cahuc, Pierre, 2014. "Trust, Growth, and Well-Being: New Evidence and Policy Implications," Handbook of Economic Growth, in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 2, pages 49-120, Elsevier.
    16. Daniel Ji & Pablo Guillen, 2010. "Trust, discrimination and acculturation Experimental evidence on Asian international and Australian domestic university students," ThE Papers 09/12, Department of Economic Theory and Economic History of the University of Granada..
    17. Schwerter, Frederik & Zimmermann, Florian, 2020. "Determinants of trust: The role of personal experiences," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 413-425.
    18. 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.
    19. Thomas Buser, 2010. "Handedness predicts Social Preferences: Evidence connecting the Lab to the Field," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 10-119/3, Tinbergen Institute.
    20. Borghans, J.A.M. & Borghans, Lex & Weel, Bas ter, 2005. "Is There a Link between Economic Outcomes and Genetic Evolution? Cross-Country Evidence from the Major Histocompatibility Complex," Research Memorandum 029, Maastricht University, Maastricht Economic Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    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:bro:econwp:2012-1. 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: Brown Economics Webmaster (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.