IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/107048.html

Georgia Leads in Prosociality: Comparison to Cross-Cultural Economic Experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Mekvabishvili, Rati

Abstract

Recent experimental economic research highlights the importance of Altruism and prosociality in many economic relations. Our experiment replicates the cross-cultural public goods game experiment conducted in 16 different countries by (Herrmann, Thöni, and Gächter 2008). We find that the mean contributions in standard public goods experiment with voluntary contribution in Tbilisi participant pool appears the highest compared to 16 experiment participant pool of different countries. Moreover, our experimental results show surprisingly flat pattern of mean contributions, indicating on strong evidence of altruism and prosociality. Individual level experimental data tentatively suggests, the repeated game incentives and considerable portion of altruism seems to reinforce each other and motivate subjects' genuine generosity reputation building, as it is a distinct and esteemed character of Georgian culture. In our view, our results of strong evidence of altruism contributes to the cross-cultural economic research of human cooperation.

Suggested Citation

  • Mekvabishvili, Rati, 2021. "Georgia Leads in Prosociality: Comparison to Cross-Cultural Economic Experiment," MPRA Paper 107048, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:107048
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/107048/1/MPRA_paper_107048.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fischbacher, Urs & Gachter, Simon & Fehr, Ernst, 2001. "Are people conditionally cooperative? Evidence from a public goods experiment," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 71(3), pages 397-404, June.
    2. Antonio A. Arechar & Simon Gächter & Lucas Molleman, 2018. "Conducting interactive experiments online," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 21(1), pages 99-131, March.
    3. Simon Gachter & Ernst Fehr, 2000. "Cooperation and Punishment in Public Goods Experiments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(4), pages 980-994, September.
    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. Ramzi Suleiman & Yuval Samid, 2021. "Punishment Strategies across Societies: Conventional Wisdoms Reconsidered," Games, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-23, August.

    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. Heinrich H. Nax & Stefano Balietti & Ryan O. Murphy & Dirk Helbing, 2018. "Adding noise to the institution: an experimental welfare investigation of the contribution-based grouping mechanism," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 50(2), pages 213-245, February.
    2. Diederich, Johannes & Goeschl, Timo & Waichman, Israel, 2023. "Self-nudging is more ethical, but less efficient than social nudging," Working Papers 0726, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    3. Diederich, Johannes & Goeschl, Timo & Waichman, Israel, 2025. "Trading off autonomy and efficiency in choice architectures: Self-nudging versus social nudging," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 229(C).
    4. Kamei, Kenju, 2016. "Information Disclosure and Cooperation in a Finitely-repeated Dilemma: Experimental Evidence," MPRA Paper 75100, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Decker, Torsten & Stiehler, Andreas & Strobel, Martin, 2002. "A Comparison of Punishment Rules in Repeated Public Good Games - An Experimental Study," Research Memorandum 020, Maastricht University, Maastricht Economic Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    6. Zvonimir Bašić & Parampreet C. Bindra & Daniela Glätzle-Rützler & Angelo Romano & Matthias Sutter & Claudia Zoller, 2021. "The Roots of Cooperation," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 097, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    7. Elena Cettolin & Arno Riedl, 2011. "Partial Coercion, Conditional Cooperation, and Self-Commitment in Voluntary Contributions to Public Goods," CESifo Working Paper Series 3556, CESifo.
    8. van der Heijden, Eline & Potters, Jan & Sefton, Martin, 2009. "Hierarchy and opportunism in teams," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 39-50, January.
    9. Ghidoni, Riccardo & Suetens, Sigrid, 2019. "Empirical Evidence on Repeated Sequential Games," Other publications TiSEM ff3a441f-e196-4e45-ba59-c, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    10. Simon Gächter & Lucas Molleman & Daniele Nosenzo, 2025. "Why people follow rules," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 9(7), pages 1342-1354, July.
    11. Bruno S. Frey & Stephan Meier, "undated". "Pro-Social Behavior, Reciprocity or Both?," IEW - Working Papers 107, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    12. Almeida, Sergio, 2023. "Punishment credibility and cooperation in public good games," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    13. Falvey, Rod & Lane, Tom & Luckraz, Shravan, 2025. "On a mechanism that improves efficiency and reduces inequality in voluntary contribution games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 518-536.
    14. Grigoriadis, Theocharis, 2017. "Religion, administration & public goods: Experimental evidence from Russia," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 42-60.
    15. Galbiati, Roberto & Vertova, Pietro, 2008. "Obligations and cooperative behaviour in public good games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 146-170, September.
    16. John Duffy & Jonathan Lafky, 2014. "Birth, Death and Public Good Provision," Working Paper 520, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh, revised Jan 2014.
    17. Andrej Angelovski & Tibor Neugebauer & Maroš Servatka, 2019. "Can Rank-Order Competition Resolve the Free-Rider Problem in the Voluntary Provision of Impure Public Goods? Experimental Evidence," Working Papers CESARE 1705, Dipartimento di Economia e Finanza, LUISS Guido Carli.
    18. Urs Fischbacher & Simon Gaechter, 2008. "Heterogeneous Social Preferences And The Dynamics Of Free Riding In Public Good Experiments," Discussion Papers 2008-07, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    19. Urs Fischbacher & Simon Gachter, 2010. "Social Preferences, Beliefs, and the Dynamics of Free Riding in Public Goods Experiments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 541-556, March.
    20. Molina, José Alberto & Ferrer, Alfredo & Gimenez-Nadal, José Ignacio & Gracia-Lazaro, Carlos & Moreno, Yamir & Sanchez, Angel, 2016. "The Effect of Kinship on Intergenerational Cooperation: A Lab Experiment with Three Generations," IZA Discussion Papers 9842, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C92 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Group Behavior
    • H41 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Public Goods

    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:pra:mprapa:107048. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.