IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ulp/sbbeta/2019-05.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Promoting socially desirable behaviors: experimental comparison of the procedures of persuasion and commitment

Author

Listed:
  • Cécile Bazart
  • Mathieu Lefebvre
  • Julie Rosaz

Abstract

In a series of experiments, we test the relative efficiency of persuasion and commitment schemes to increase and sustain contribution levels in a Voluntary Contribution Game. The design allows to compare a baseline consisting of a repeated public good game to, respectively, four manipulation treatments relying on: an information strategy, a low commitment strategy, a high commitment strategy and a promise strategy. We confirm the advantages of psychologically orientated policies as they increase the overall level of contribution and for some, that is commitment and promises, question the decreasing trend traditionally observed in long term contributions to public goods.

Suggested Citation

  • Cécile Bazart & Mathieu Lefebvre & Julie Rosaz, 2019. "Promoting socially desirable behaviors: experimental comparison of the procedures of persuasion and commitment," Working Papers of BETA 2019-05, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
  • Handle: RePEc:ulp:sbbeta:2019-05
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://beta.u-strasbg.fr/WP/2019/2019-05.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ben Greiner, 2015. "Subject pool recruitment procedures: organizing experiments with ORSEE," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 1(1), pages 114-125, July.
    2. Tore Ellingsen & Magnus Johannesson, 2004. "Promises, Threats and Fairness," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(495), pages 397-420, April.
    3. Jérôme Hergueux & Nicolas Jacquemet & Stéphane Luchini & Jason F. Shogren, 2022. "Leveraging the Honor Code: Public Goods Contributions under Oath," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 81(3), pages 591-616, March.
    4. Uri Gneezy & Stephan Meier & Pedro Rey-Biel, 2011. "When and Why Incentives (Don't) Work to Modify Behavior," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 25(4), pages 191-210, Fall.
    5. H. Peyton Young, 2015. "The Evolution of Social Norms," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 7(1), pages 359-387, August.
    6. Di Bartolomeo, Giovanni & Dufwenberg, Martin & Papa, Stefano & Passarelli, Francesco, 2019. "Promises, expectations & causation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 137-146.
    7. Bhanot, Syon P., 2017. "Cheap promises: Evidence from loan repayment pledges in an online experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 246-266.
    8. Ryan Muldoon & Chiara Lisciandra & Cristina Bicchieri & Stephan Hartmann & Jan Sprenger, 2014. "On the emergence of descriptive norms," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 13(1), pages 3-22, February.
    9. Elster, Jon, 1989. "Social Norms and Economic Theory," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 3(4), pages 99-117, Fall.
    10. Benno Torgler, 2004. "Moral Suasion: An alternative tax policy strategy? Evidence from a controlled field experiment in Switzerland," CREMA Working Paper Series 2004-01, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    11. Charness, Gary & Du, Ninghua & Yang, Chun-Lei & Yao, Lan, 2013. "Promises in contract design," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 194-208.
    12. Chantal Toledo, 2016. "Do Environmental Messages Work on the Poor? Experimental Evidence from Brazilian Favelas," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 3(1), pages 37-83.
    13. Sheppard, Blair H & Hartwick, Jon & Warshaw, Paul R, 1988. "The Theory of Reasoned Action: A Meta-analysis of Past Research with Recommendations for Modifications and Future Research," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 15(3), pages 325-343, December.
    14. Abebe Shimeles & Daniel Zerfu Gurara & Firew Woldeyes, 2017. "Taxman's Dilemma: Coercion or Persuasion? Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment in Ethiopia," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(5), pages 420-424, May.
    15. Ananish Chaudhuri, 2011. "Sustaining cooperation in laboratory public goods experiments: a selective survey of the literature," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 14(1), pages 47-83, March.
    16. Benno Torgler, 2004. "Moral suasion: An alternative tax policy strategy? Evidence from a controlled field experiment in Switzerland," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 5(3), pages 235-253, November.
    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. Attallah, May & Abildtrup, Jens & Stenger, Anne, 2022. "Non-monetary incentives for sustainable biomass harvest: An experimental approach," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    2. Agnès Festré & Ankinée Kirakozian & Mira Toumi, 2019. "La menace est plus forte que l'exécution, mais pas pour tous : sanction versus recommandation par un tiers dans une expérience de bien public," GREDEG Working Papers 2019-15, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.

    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. Ann-Kathrin Koessler & Lionel Page & Uwe Dulleck, 2021. "Public cooperation statements," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 16(4), pages 747-767, October.
    2. Romaniuc Rustam, 2016. "What Makes Law to Change Behavior? An Experimental Study," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(2), pages 447-475, July.
    3. Barron, Kai & Nurminen, Tuomas, 2018. "Nudging cooperation," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Economics of Change SP II 2018-305, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    4. Dina Pomeranz & José Vila-Belda, 2019. "Taking State-Capacity Research to the Field: Insights from Collaborations with Tax Authorities," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 11(1), pages 755-781, August.
    5. Florian Engl & Arno Riedl & Roberto Weber, 2021. "Spillover Effects of Institutions on Cooperative Behavior, Preferences, and Beliefs," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 13(4), pages 261-299, November.
    6. Biddle, Nicholas & Fels, Katja M. & Sinning, Mathias, 2018. "Behavioral insights on business taxation: Evidence from two natural field experiments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 30-49.
    7. Biddle, Nicholas & Fels, Katja & Sinning, Mathias, 2017. "Behavioral insights and business taxation: Evidence from two randomized controlled trials," Ruhr Economic Papers 698, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    8. Felix Koelle & Tom Lane & Daniele Nosenzo & Chris Starmer, 2017. "Nudging the electorate: what works and why?," Discussion Papers 2017-16, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    9. Jérôme Hergueux & Nicolas Jacquemet & Stéphane Luchini & Jason F. Shogren, 2022. "Leveraging the Honor Code: Public Goods Contributions under Oath," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 81(3), pages 591-616, March.
    10. Kölle, Felix & Quercia, Simone, 2021. "The influence of empirical and normative expectations on cooperation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 691-703.
    11. Ismaël Rafaï & Mira Toumi, 2017. "Pay Attention or Be Paid for Attention? Impact of Incentives on Allocation of Attention," GREDEG Working Papers 2017-11, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    12. Vesely, Stepan & Wengström, Erik, 2017. "Risk and Cooperation: Experimental Evidence from Stochastic Public Good Games," Working Papers 2017:3, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    13. Kamm, Aaron & Koch, Christian & Nikiforakis, Nikos, 2021. "The ghost of institutions past: History as an obstacle to fighting tax evasion?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    14. Antinyan, Armenak & Asatryan, Zareh, 2019. "Nudging for tax compliance: A meta-analysis," ZEW Discussion Papers 19-055, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    15. Mathieu Lefebvre & Anne Stenger, 2020. "Short- & long-term effects of monetary and non-monetary incentives to cooperate in public good games: An experiment," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(1), pages 1-17, January.
    16. Agnès Festré & Ankinée Kirakozian & Mira Toumi, 2019. "La menace est plus forte que l'exécution, mais pas pour tous : sanction versus recommandation par un tiers dans une expérience de bien public," GREDEG Working Papers 2019-15, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    17. Felix Kölle & Thomas Lauer, 2020. "Understanding Cooperation in an Intertemporal Context," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 046, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    18. Koessler, Ann-Kathrin, 2022. "Pledges and how social influence shapes their effectiveness," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    19. Maho Nakagawa & Mathieu Lefebvre & Anne Stenger, 2022. "Long-lasting effects of incentives and social preference: A public goods experiment," Post-Print hal-03777681, HAL.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Experiment; Persuasion; Commitment; Voluntary Contribution Mechanism.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making
    • 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:ulp:sbbeta:2019-05. 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: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/bestrfr.html .

    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: The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask the person in charge to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/bestrfr.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.