Partner selection in public goods experiments
This paper studies the e_ect of introducing costly partner selection for the voluntary contribution to a public good. Subjects participate in six sequences of five rounds of a two-person public good game in partner design. At the end of each sequence subjects can select a new partner out of six group members. Unidirectional and bidirectional partner selection mechanisms are introduced and compared to controls with random partner rematching. Results demonstrate significantly higher contributions in correspondence to unidirectional partner selection than to bidirectional selection and random rematching. Average monetary valuation of being able to choose a partner is substantially high and remains stable.
|Date of creation:||Jun 2003|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Kahlaische Strasse 10, D-07745 Jena|
Phone: +49-3641-68 65
Fax: +49-3641-68 69 90
Web page: http://www.econ.mpg.de/
More information through EDIRC
|Order Information:|| Web: http://www.econ.mpg.de/english/research/ESI/discuss.php Email: |
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Anna Gunnthorsdottir & Daniel Houser & Kevin McCabe & Holly Ameden, 2004.
"Disposition, History and Contributions in Public Goods Experiments,"
- Gunnthorsdottir, Anna & Houser, Daniel & McCabe, Kevin, 2007. "Disposition, history and contributions in public goods experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 304-315, February.
- Glomm, Gerhard & Lagunoff, Roger, 1998.
"A Tiebout theory of public vs private provision of collective goods,"
Journal of Public Economics,
Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 91-112, April.
- Roger Lagunoff & Gerhard Glomm, 1997. "A Tiebout Theory of Public vs Private Provision of Collective Goods," Game Theory and Information 9707008, EconWPA.
- Smith, Vernon L, 1985. "Experimental Economics: Reply," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(1), pages 264-72, March.
- Karl-Martin Ehrhart & Claudia Keser, 1999. "Mobility and Cooperation: On the Run," CIRANO Working Papers 99s-24, CIRANO.
- R. Mark Isaac & James M. Walker, 1988.
"Group Size Effects in Public Goods Provision: The Voluntary Contributions Mechanism,"
The Quarterly Journal of Economics,
Oxford University Press, vol. 103(1), pages 179-199.
- R. M. Isaac & J. M. Walker, 2010. "Group size effects in public goods provision: The voluntary contribution mechanism," Levine's Working Paper Archive 310, David K. Levine.
- Ehrhart, Karl-Martin & Keser, Claudia, 1999. "Mobility and cooperation: on the run," Sonderforschungsbereich 504 Publications 99-69, Sonderforschungsbereich 504, Universität Mannheim;Sonderforschungsbereich 504, University of Mannheim.
- Andreoni, James, 1988. "Why free ride? : Strategies and learning in public goods experiments," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 291-304, December.
- Andreoni,J. & Croson,R., 1998.
"Partners versus strangers : random rematching in public goods experiments,"
11, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
- Andreoni, James & Croson, Rachel, 2008. "Partners versus Strangers: Random Rematching in Public Goods Experiments," Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, Elsevier.
- James Andreoni & Rachel Croson, 2001. "Partners versus Strangers: Random Rematching in Public Goods Experiments," Levine's Working Paper Archive 563824000000000132, David K. Levine.
- Urs Fischbacher, 2007. "z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 171-178, June.
- Talbot Page & Louis Putterman & Bulent Unel, 2002.
"Voluntary Association in Public Goods Experiments: Reciprocity, Mimicry and Efficiency,"
2002-19, Brown University, Department of Economics.
- Talbot Page & Louis Putterman & Bulent Unel, 2005. "Voluntary Association in Public Goods Experiments: Reciprocity, Mimicry and Efficiency," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 115(506), pages 1032-1053, October.
- Esther Hauk & Rosemarie Nagel, 2000. "Choice of partners in multiple two-person prisoner's dilemma games: An experimental study," Economics Working Papers 487, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:esi:discus:2003-13. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Karin Richter)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.