IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/euvwdp/278.html

More risk - less solidarity? An experimental investigation

Author

Listed:
  • Costard, Jano

Abstract

A solidarity game was conducted where participants were able to choose between two lotteries with same expected values. However, in one lottery, the risky one, participants faced a higher probability to receive no endowment. The winners were then able to discriminate between subjects risk attitude when it came to voluntary transfers from winners to losers in randomly formed three person groups. The results indicated that risk takers were not fully held responsible for their self-inflicted neediness, although they received on average fewer transfers than non-risk-takers. In fact, group favoritism is observed, where non-risk-takers transferred more to loosing non-risk-takers and risk-takers transferred more to loosing risk-takers. This behavioral pattern was stable across different versions of group compounding, profession and gender. Nevertheless, a gender effect was found with regard to lottery choice and the amount of money transferred. Furthermore, similarities can be seen between the results of the experiment and certain aspects of the current financial crisis. Among them borrowing in non-recourse states in the USA, the role of rating agencies and the hiring of failed CEOs.

Suggested Citation

  • Costard, Jano, 2009. "More risk - less solidarity? An experimental investigation," Discussion Papers 278, European University Viadrina Frankfurt (Oder), Department of Business Administration and Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:euvwdp:278
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a
    for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Buchner, Susanne & Coricelli, Giorgio & Greiner, Ben, 2007. "Self-centered and other-regarding behavior in the solidarity game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 293-303, February.
    2. Simon Gächter & Armin Falk, 2002. "Reputation and Reciprocity: Consequences for the Labour Relation," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 104(1), pages 1-26, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Costard, Jano, 2011. "More risk - less solidarity? An experimental investigation," Discussion Papers 278 [rev.], European University Viadrina Frankfurt (Oder), Department of Business Administration and Economics.
    2. Thomas Dohmen & Armin Falk & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde, 2009. "Homo Reciprocans: Survey Evidence on Behavioural Outcomes," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 119(536), pages 592-612, March.
    3. repec:esx:essedp:762 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Siegfried Berninghaus & Sabrina Bleich & Werner Güth, 2013. "The Consequences Of (De)Regulation On Employment Duration And Efficiency: An Experimental Study," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 51(1), pages 1050-1065, January.
    5. 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.
    6. Simon Gächter & Lingbo Huang & Martin Sefton, 2016. "Combining “real effort” with induced effort costs: the ball-catching task," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 19(4), pages 687-712, December.
    7. Yiting Guo & Jason Shachat & Matthew J. Walker & Lijia Wei, 2021. "Viral social media videos can raise pro-social behaviours when an epidemic arises," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 7(2), pages 120-138, December.
    8. Christian Korth, 2009. "Reciprocity—An Indirect Evolutionary Analysis," Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, in: Fairness in Bargaining and Markets, chapter 0, pages 35-55, Springer.
    9. Werner Güth & Vittoria Levati & Georg von Wangenheim, 2004. "Relatives Versus Neighbors - An Experiment Studying Spontaneous Social Exchange -," Papers on Strategic Interaction 2004-33, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group.
    10. Stanca, Luca, 2010. "How to be kind? Outcomes versus intentions as determinants of fairness," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 106(1), pages 19-21, January.
    11. Kellner, Christian & Reinstein, David & Riener, Gerhard & Sanders, Michael, 2015. "Giving and Probability," Economics Discussion Papers 13794, University of Essex, Department of Economics.
    12. Dittrich, Dennis A.V. & Büchner, Susanne & Kulesz, Micaela M., 2015. "Dynamic repeated random dictatorship and gender discrimination," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 81-90.
    13. Susann Fiedler & Dshamilja Marie Hellmann & Angela Rachael Dorrough & Andreas Glöckner, 2018. "Cross-national in-group favoritism in prosocial behavior: Evidence from Latin and North America," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 13(1), pages 42-60, January.
    14. Uwe Jirjahn & Vanessa Lange, 2015. "Reciprocity and Workers’ Tastes for Representation," Journal of Labor Research, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 188-209, June.
    15. Greiner, Ben & Vittoria Levati, M., 2005. "Indirect reciprocity in cyclical networks: An experimental study," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 711-731, October.
    16. Peiyao Shen & Regina Betz & Andreas Ortmann & Rukai Gong, 2020. "Improving Truthful Reporting of Polluting Firms by Rotating Inspectors: Experimental Evidence from a Bribery Game," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 76(2), pages 201-233, July.
    17. Florian Fuchs & Volker Lingnau, 2024. "The Homo Economicus as a Prototype of a Psychopath? A Conceptual Analysis and Implications for Business Research and Teaching," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 195(4), pages 763-777, December.
    18. Rudolf Kerschbamer & Regine Oexl, 2023. "Correction to: The effect of random shocks on reciprocal behavior in dynamic principal-agent settings," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 26(2), pages 489-489, April.
    19. Zhang, Zhipeng & Wu, Yu’e & Zhang, Shuhua, 2022. "Reputation-based asymmetric comparison of fitness promotes cooperation on complex networks," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 608(P1).
    20. Luisa Faust & Maura Kolbe & Sasan Mansouri & Paul P. Momtaz, 2022. "The Crowdfunding of Altruism," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-29, March.
    21. Christian Grund & Kirsten Thommes, 2017. "The Role of Contract Types for Employees’ Public Service Motivation," Schmalenbach Business Review, Springer;Schmalenbach-Gesellschaft, vol. 18(4), pages 377-398, October.

    More about this item

    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:zbw:euvwdp:278. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fwffode.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.