IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/chu/wpaper/16-17.html

Trust and Trustworthiness under Information Asymmetry and Ambiguity

Author

Listed:
  • Irma Clots-Figueras

    (Universidad Carlos III de Madrid)

  • Roberto Hernán González

    (University of Nottingham and Economic Science Institute, Chapman University)

  • Praveen Kujal

    (Middlesex University and Economic Science Institute, Chapman University)

Abstract

We introduce uncertainty and ambiguity in the standard investment game. In the uncertainty treatment, investors are informed that the return of the investment is drawn from a publicly known distribution function. In the ambiguity treatment, investors are not informed about the distribution function. We find that both trust and trustworthiness are robust to the introduction of these changes.

Suggested Citation

  • Irma Clots-Figueras & Roberto Hernán González & Praveen Kujal, 2016. "Trust and Trustworthiness under Information Asymmetry and Ambiguity," Working Papers 16-17, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.
    • Handle: RePEc:chu:wpaper:16-17
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.chapman.edu/research-and-institutions/economic-science-institute/_files/WorkingPapers/clots-figueras-herna%CC%81n-gonza%CC%81lez-kujal-2016%20.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Johnson, Noel D. & Mislin, Alexandra A., 2011. "Trust games: A meta-analysis," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 865-889.
    2. Cox, James C., 2004. "How to identify trust and reciprocity," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 260-281, February.
    3. Berg Joyce & Dickhaut John & McCabe Kevin, 1995. "Trust, Reciprocity, and Social History," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 122-142, July.
    4. Daniel Ellsberg, 1961. "Risk, Ambiguity, and the Savage Axioms," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 75(4), pages 643-669.
    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. Ho Fai Chan & Martin Brumpton & Alison Macintyre & Jefferson Arapoc & David A. Savage & Ahmed Skali & David Stadelmann & Benno Torgler, 2020. "How confidence in health care systems affects mobility and compliance during the COVID-19 pandemic," CREMA Working Paper Series 2020-11, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    2. Fooken, Jonas, 2023. "Trusting when risk and ambiguity create opportunities for exploitation," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    3. van den Akker, Olmo R. & van Assen, Marcel A.L.M. & van Vugt, Mark & Wicherts, Jelte M., 2020. "Sex differences in trust and trustworthiness: A meta-analysis of the trust game and the gift-exchange game," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    4. Jin, Shan & Yan, Sibo & Zhang, Xiaomeng, 2025. "Measuring trust across countries: Inconsistencies between experiments and surveys," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 248(C).
    5. 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.

    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. Fairley, Kim & Sanfey, Alan & Vyrastekova, Jana & Weitzel, Utz, 2012. "Social risk and ambiguity in the trust game," MPRA Paper 42302, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Anne Corcos & François Pannequin & Sacha Bourgeois-Gironde, 2012. "Aversions to Trust," Recherches économiques de Louvain, De Boeck Université, vol. 78(3), pages 115-134.
    3. Kant, Shashi & Vertinsky, Ilan, 2022. "The anatomy of social capital of a Canadian indigenous community: Implications of social trust field experiments for community-based forest management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    4. Calabuig, Vicente & Fatas, Enrique & Olcina, Gonzalo & Rodriguez-Lara, Ismael, 2016. "Carry a big stick, or no stick at all," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 153-171.
    5. Yashodha, 2019. "Trust and kinship: experimental evidence from rural India," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 5(2), pages 223-237, December.
    6. 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.
    7. Bejarano, Hernán & Gillet, Joris & Rodriguez-Lara, Ismael, 2021. "Trust and trustworthiness after negative random shocks," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    8. Morreale, Azzurra & Mittone, Luigi & Lo Nigro, Giovanna, 2019. "Risky choices in strategic environments: An experimental investigation of a real options game," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 279(1), pages 143-158.
    9. Daniel Woods & Maroš Servátka, 2019. "Nice to you, nicer to me: Does self-serving generosity diminish the reciprocal response?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(2), pages 506-529, June.
    10. Goeschl, Timo & Jarke, Johannes, 2014. "Trust, but verify? When trustworthiness is observable only through (costly) monitoring," WiSo-HH Working Paper Series 20, University of Hamburg, Faculty of Business, Economics and Social Sciences, WISO Research Laboratory.
    11. Zakaria Babutsidze & Nobuyuki Hanaki & Adam Zylbersztejn, 2021. "Nonverbal content and trust: An experiment on digital communication," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(4), pages 1517-1532, October.
    12. Zakaria Babutsidze & Nobuyuki Hanaki & Adam Zylbersztejn, 2020. "Nonverbal content and swift trust: An experiment on digital communication," Working Papers 2008, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon St-Etienne (GATE Lyon St-Etienne), Université de Lyon.
    13. Kim, Jeongbin & Putterman, Louis & Zhang, Xinyi, 2022. "Trust, Beliefs and Cooperation: Excavating a Foundation of Strong Economies," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    14. Bartoš, Vojtěch & Levely, Ian, 2021. "Sanctioning and trustworthiness across ethnic groups: Experimental evidence from Afghanistan," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    15. Boulu-Reshef, Béatrice & Kuechle, Graciela & Rohland, Luise Marie, 2024. "Signaling trustworthiness with the choice of a prosocial project: Theory and experiment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    16. Levely, Ian & Bartos, Vojtech, 2018. "Sanctioning and Trustworthiness Across Ethnic Groups," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 107, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    17. Berlingieri, Francesco & Kovacic, Matija & Stepanova, Elena, 2025. "Trust behaviour of sexual minorities: Evidence from a large-scale trust game experiment," GLO Discussion Paper Series 1582, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    18. Martin G. Kocher, 2015. "How Trust in Social Dilemmas Evolves with Age," CESifo Working Paper Series 5447, CESifo.
    19. repec:osf:socarx:p4tw2_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. 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).
    21. Murnighan, J. Keith & Wang, Long, 2016. "The social world as an experimental game," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 80-94.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • A1 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics
    • C9 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments
    • D8 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty

    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:chu:wpaper:16-17. 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: Megan Luetje (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/esichus.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.