The econometric modeling of social Preferences
Experimental data on social preferences present a number of features that need to be incorporated in econometric modelling. We explore a variety of econometric modelling approaches to the analysis of such data. The approaches under consideration are: the random utility approach (in which it is assumed that each possible action yields a utility with a deterministic and a stochastic component, and that the individual selects the action yielding the highest utility); the random behavioural approach (which assumes that the individual computes the maximum of a deterministic utility function, and that computational error causes their observed behaviour to depart stochastically from this optimum); and the random preference approach (in which all variation in behaviour is attributed to stochastic variation in the parameters of the deterministic component of utility). These approaches are applied in various ways to an experiment on fairness conducted by Cappelen et al. (2007). At least two of the models that we estimate succeed in capturing the key features of the data set.
|Date of creation:||29 Jun 2010|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Carl-Zeiss-Strasse 3, 07743 JENA|
Phone: +049 3641/ 9 43000
Fax: +049 3641/ 9 43000
Web page: http://www.jenecon.de
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Anderson, Simon P. & Goeree, Jacob K. & Holt, Charles A., 1998. "A theoretical analysis of altruism and decision error in public goods games," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 297-323, November.
- Alexander W. Cappelen & Astri Drange Hole & Erik Ø Sørensen & Bertil Tungodden, 2007.
"The Pluralism of Fairness Ideals: An Experimental Approach,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 97(3), pages 818-827, June.
- Alexander W. Cappelen & Astri D. Hole & Erik Ø. Sørensen & Bertil Tungodden, 2005. "The Pluralism of Fairness Ideals: An Experimental Approach," CESifo Working Paper Series 1611, CESifo Group Munich.
- Arthur van Soest, 1995. "Structural Models of Family Labor Supply: A Discrete Choice Approach," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 30(1), pages 63-88.
- Fabrizio Botti & Anna Conte & Daniela T. Di Cagno & Carlo D'Ippoliti, .
"Risk attitude in real decision proBLEMs,"
144, Dipartimento di Economia e Finanza, LUISS Guido Carli.
- Loomes, Graham & Moffatt, Peter G & Sugden, Robert, 2002.
" A Microeconometric Test of Alternative Stochastic Theories of Risky Choice,"
Journal of Risk and Uncertainty,
Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 103-30, March.
- Loomes, G. & Moffatt, P.G. & Sugden, R., 1998. "A Microeconometric Test of Alternative Stochastic Theories of Risky Choice," University of East Anglia Discussion Papers in Economics 9806, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
- Train,Kenneth E., 2009.
"Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation,"
Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, 1.
- Bellemare, C. & Kroger, S. & van Soest, A.H.O., 2008.
"Measuring inequity aversion in a heterogeneous population using experimental decisions and subjective probabilities,"
Other publications TiSEM
f17bda32-98f9-4580-ab3f-6, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
- Charles Bellemare & Sabine Kröger & Arthur van Soest, 2008. "Measuring Inequity Aversion in a Heterogeneous Population Using Experimental Decisions and Subjective Probabilities," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 76(4), pages 815-839, 07.
- Anna Conte & M. Vittoria Levati, 2011.
"Use of data on planned contributions and stated beliefs in the measurement of social preferences,"
Jena Economic Research Papers
2011-039, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
- Anna Conte & M. Levati, 2014. "Use of data on planned contributions and stated beliefs in the measurement of social preferences," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 76(2), pages 201-223, February.
- Conte, Anna & Hey, John D. & Moffatt, Peter G., 2011.
"Mixture models of choice under risk,"
Journal of Econometrics,
Elsevier, vol. 162(1), pages 79-88, May.
- Nicholas Bardsley, 2000. "Control Without Deception: Individual Behaviour in Free-Riding Experiments Revisited," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 3(3), pages 215-240, December.
- Anna Conte & Daniela Di Cagno & Emanuela Sciubba, 2009.
"Strategies in Social Network Formation,"
Jena Economic Research Papers
2009-095, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
- Spanos, Aris, 2010. "Akaike-type criteria and the reliability of inference: Model selection versus statistical model specification," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 158(2), pages 204-220, October.
- repec:oup:restud:v:75:y:2008:i:3:p:729-762 is not listed on IDEAS
- Nicholas Bardsley & Peter Moffatt, 2007.
"The Experimetrics of Public Goods: Inferring Motivations from Contributions,"
Theory and Decision,
Springer, vol. 62(2), pages 161-193, March.
- Nicholas Bardsley & Peter Moffatt, 2005. "The Experimetrics of Public Goods: Inferring Motivations from Contributions," Discussion Papers 2005-09, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
- Todd L. Cherry & Peter Frykblom & Jason F. Shogren, 2002.
"Hardnose the Dictator,"
02-06, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
- Stahl, Dale II & Wilson, Paul W., 1994. "Experimental evidence on players' models of other players," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 309-327, December.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:jrp:jrpwrp:2010-042. 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: (Markus Pasche)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.