IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cla/levarc/786969000000001843.html

Behavioral Mechanism Design as a Benchmark for Experimental Studies

Author

Listed:
  • David K Levine

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • David K Levine, 2026. "Behavioral Mechanism Design as a Benchmark for Experimental Studies," Levine's Working Paper Archive 786969000000001843, David K. Levine.
    • Handle: RePEc:cla:levarc:786969000000001843
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.dklevine.com/archive/refs4786969000000001843.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John A. List, 2007. "On the Interpretation of Giving in Dictator Games," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 115(3), pages 482-493.
    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. David K Levine, 2024. "Behavioral Mechanism Design in the Repeated Prisoner's Dilemma," Levine's Working Paper Archive 11694000000000190, David K. Levine.
    2. David K Levine, 2024. "Method of Moments and Maximum Likelihood in the Laboratory," Levine's Working Paper Archive 11694000000000208, David K. Levine.
    3. David K Levine, 2026. "The Largesse Design Problem," Levine's Working Paper Archive 735347000000000031, David K. Levine.
    4. David K Levine, 2026. "Predicting Cooperation with Welfare Maximization and Trembles," Levine's Working Paper Archive 735347000000000007, David K. Levine.

    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. Wendelin Schnedler & Nina Lucia Stephan, 2020. "Revisiting a Remedy Against Chains of Unkindness," Schmalenbach Business Review, Springer;Schmalenbach-Gesellschaft, vol. 72(3), pages 347-364, July.
    2. Ertac, Seda & Gumren, Mert & Gurdal, Mehmet Y., 2020. "Demand for decision autonomy and the desire to avoid responsibility in risky environments: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    3. Gary Bolton & Eugen Dimant & Ulrich Schmidt, 2018. "When a Nudge Backfires. Using Observation with Social and Economic Incentives to Promote Pro-Social Behavior," PPE Working Papers 0017, Philosophy, Politics and Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    4. Brock, J Michelle, 2018. "Inequality of opportunity, governance and individual beliefs," CEPR Discussion Papers 12636, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    5. M. Vittoria Levati & Aaron Nicholas & Birendra Rai, 2011. "Testing the Analytical Framework of Other-Regarding Preferences," Monash Economics Working Papers 26-11, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    6. Emin Karagözoğlu & Elif Tosun, 2022. "Endogenous Game Choice and Giving Behavior in Distribution Games," Games, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-32, November.
    7. Menusch Khadjavi, 2018. "Deterrence works for criminals," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 165-178, August.
    8. Choi, Syngjoo & Kim, Byung-Yeon & Lee, Jungmin & Lee, Sokbae, 2020. "A tale of two Koreas: Property rights and fairness," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 170(C), pages 112-130.
    9. Ahrens, Steffen & Bosch-Rosa, Ciril, 2022. "Motivated beliefs, social preferences, and limited liability in financial decision-making," Discussion Papers 2022/8, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.
    10. Ubeda, Paloma, 2014. "The consistency of fairness rules: An experimental study," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 88-100.
    11. Valerio Capraro & Roberto Di Paolo & Veronica Pizziol, 2023. "Assessing Large Language Models' ability to predict how humans balance self-interest and the interest of others," Papers 2307.12776, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2024.
    12. Nadine Chlaß & Peter G. Moffatt, 2017. "Giving in Dictator Games - Experimenter Demand Effect or Preference over the Rules of the Game?," Jena Economics Research Papers 2012-044, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    13. Aycinena, Diego & Bogliacino, Francesco & Kimbrough, Erik O., 2024. "Measuring norms: Assessing the threat of social desirability bias to the Bicchieri and Xiao elicitation method," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 225-239.
    14. Omar Al-Ubaydli & John List & Claire Mackevicius & Min Sok Lee & Dana Suskind, 2019. "How Can Experiments Play a Greater Role in Public Policy? 12 Proposals from an Economic Model of Scaling," Artefactual Field Experiments 00679, The Field Experiments Website.
    15. John A. List, 2024. "Optimally generate policy-based evidence before scaling," Nature, Nature, vol. 626(7999), pages 491-499, February.
    16. Belot, Michèle & Schröder, Marina, 2013. "Sloppy work, lies and theft: A novel experimental design to study counterproductive behaviour," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 233-238.
    17. Rocco Caferra & Andrea Morone & Piergiuseppe Morone, 2024. "Inequalities under Ambiguity," Working papers 115, Società Italiana di Economia Pubblica.
    18. Jared Rubin & Roman Sheremeta, 2016. "Principal–Agent Settings with Random Shocks," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(4), pages 985-999, April.
    19. Oleg Korenok & Edward Millner & Laura Razzolini, 2014. "Taking, giving, and impure altruism in dictator games," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 17(3), pages 488-500, September.
    20. John List, 2022. "2021 Summary Data of Natural Field Experiments Published on Fieldexperiments.com," Natural Field Experiments 00747, The Field Experiments Website.

    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:cla:levarc:786969000000001843. 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: David K. Levine (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.dklevine.com/ .

    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.