IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Cross-cultural experimental economics and indigenous management research: Issues and contributions

  • Horak, Sven
Registered author(s):

    Cross-Cultural Experimental Economics (CCEE) and Indigenous Management Research (IMR) are dynamic and flourishing disciplines today. Whereas the former lacks a deep understanding of the distinctive factors leading to behavioral differences so far, the latter gives priority to deep contextualization and cultural embeddedness of the research design. This paper argues that both disciplines can mutually benefit from each other. Based on a review of 23 articles, four general research fields are identified that CCEE is concerned with: fairness, cooperation, trust and norm enforcement. In these fields CCEE and IMR can meet and mutually advance knowledge: CCEE can benefit by applying increased contextualization in the future, i.e., by integrating indigenous context-specific variables explicitly into future research designs; IMR can benefit by applying a replicable quantitative research methodology enabling high-quality IMR (Tsui 2004). Both approaches will benefit from increased validity if research designs are systematically integrated in a mixed method design for future research.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/73683/1/744890985.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by University of Duisburg-Essen, Institute of East Asian Studies IN-EAST in its series Duisburger Arbeitspapiere Ostasienwissenschaften with number 92/2013.

    as
    in new window

    Length:
    Date of creation: 2013
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:zbw:udedao:922013
    Contact details of provider: Postal: Universitätsstrasse 12, 45117 Essen
    Phone: 0201 - 183 3633
    Fax: 0201 - 183 2292
    Web page: http://www.uni-due.de/in-east/

    More information through EDIRC

    References listed on IDEAS
    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.:

    as in new window
    1. Steven D. Levitt & John A. List, 2007. "What Do Laboratory Experiments Measuring Social Preferences Reveal About the Real World?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 21(2), pages 153-174, Spring.
    2. Swee Hoon Chuah & Robert Hoffmann & Martin Jones & Geoffrey Williams, 2005. "An Economic Anatomy of Culture: Attitudes and Behaviour in Inter- and Intra- National Ultimatum Game Experiments," Occasional Papers 13, Industrial Economics Division.
    3. John A. List, 2006. "The Behavioralist Meets the Market: Measuring Social Preferences and Reputation Effects in Actual Transactions," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 114(1), pages 1-37, February.
    4. Binmore, Ken & Shaked, Avner, 2010. "Experimental Economics: Where Next? Rejoinder," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 120-121, January.
    5. Ernst Fehr & Urs Fischbacher, . "Third Party Punishment and Social Norms," IEW - Working Papers 106, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    6. Kwok Leung & Rabi S Bhagat & Nancy R Buchan & Miriam Erez & Cristina B Gibson, 2005. "Culture and international business: recent advances and their implications for future research," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 36(4), pages 357-378, July.
    7. Falk, Armin & Fehr, Ernst, 2003. "Why labour market experiments?," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 399-406, August.
    8. Valenzuela, Ana & Srivastava, Joydeep & Lee, Seonsu, 2005. "The role of cultural orientation in bargaining under incomplete information: Differences in causal attributions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 72-88, January.
    9. Cason, T.N. & Saijo, T. & Yamato, T., 2000. "Voluntary Participation and Spite in Public Good Provision Experiments: an International Comparison," ISER Discussion Paper 0491, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    10. Amrita Daniere & Jeff Carpenter & Lois Takahashi, 2004. "Cooperation, trust, and social capital in southeast asian urban slums," Artefactual Field Experiments 00035, The Field Experiments Website.
    11. Abigail Barr & Chris Wallace, 2009. "Homo Aequalis: A Cross-Society Experimental Analysis of Three Bargaining Games," Economics Series Working Papers 422, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    12. Min Wu & Xu Huang & Chenwei Li & Wu Liu, 2012. "Perceived Interactional Justice and Trust-in-supervisor as Mediators for Paternalistic Leadership," Management and Organization Review, The International Association for Chinese Management Research, vol. 8(1), pages 97-121, 03.
    13. Fabian Froese, 2013. "Work values of the next generation of business leaders in Shanghai, Tokyo, and Seoul," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 297-315, March.
    14. Swee Hoon Chuah & Robert Hoffmann & Martin Jones & Geoffrey Williams, 2004. "Do Cultures Clash? Evidence from Cross-National Ultimatum Game Experiments," Occasional Papers 9, Industrial Economics Division.
    15. Barr, Abigail & Serra, Danila, 2010. "Corruption and culture: An experimental analysis," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(11-12), pages 862-869, December.
    16. Martin G. Kocher & Todd L. Cherry & Stephan Kroll & Robert J. Netzer & Matthias Sutter, 2007. "Conditional cooperation on three continents," Working Papers 2007-02, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, University of Innsbruck.
    17. Chen, Kang & Tang, Fang-Fang, 2009. "Cultural differences between Tibetans and ethnic Han Chinese in ultimatum bargaining experiments," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 78-84, March.
    18. Roberto Burlando & John Hey, . "Do Anglo-Saxons Free-Ride More?," Discussion Papers 95/37, Department of Economics, University of York.
    19. Massimo Finocchiaro Castro, 2006. "Where are you from? Cultural Differences in Public Good Experiments," Royal Holloway, University of London: Discussion Papers in Economics 06/03, Department of Economics, Royal Holloway University of London, revised Jun 2006.
    20. Binmore, Ken & Shaked, Avner, 2010. "Experimental economics: Where next?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 87-100, January.
    21. Chang, Eunmi, 2006. "Individual pay for performance and commitment HR practices in South Korea," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 368-381, December.
    22. Weimann, Joachim, 1994. "Individual behaviour in a free riding experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 185-200, June.
    23. Buchan, Nancy & Croson, Rachel, 2004. "The boundaries of trust: own and others' actions in the US and China," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 55(4), pages 485-504, December.
    24. Joseph Henrich, 2000. "Does Culture Matter in Economic Behavior? Ultimatum Game Bargaining among the Machiguenga of the Peruvian Amazon," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(4), pages 973-979, September.
    25. John List, 2006. "Field experiments: A bridge between lab and naturally occurring data," Artefactual Field Experiments 00083, The Field Experiments Website.
    26. Ottone, Stefania & Ortona, Guido & Ponzano, Ferruccio & Scacciati, Francesco, 2010. "Some differences in revealed behaviour under different inquiry methods," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 546-553, October.
    27. Ana C. Santos, 2011. "Behavioural and experimental economics: are they really transforming economics?," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 35(4), pages 705-728.
    28. Guth, Werner & Schmittberger, Rolf & Schwarze, Bernd, 1982. "An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 367-388, December.
    29. Buchan, Nancy R. & Johnson, Eric J. & Croson, Rachel T.A., 2006. "Let's get personal: An international examination of the influence of communication, culture and social distance on other regarding preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 373-398, July.
    30. 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.
    31. Smith, Vernon L & Walker, James M, 1993. "Monetary Rewards and Decision Cost in Experimental Economics," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 31(2), pages 245-61, April.
    32. Hoffman Elizabeth & McCabe Kevin & Shachat Keith & Smith Vernon, 1994. "Preferences, Property Rights, and Anonymity in Bargaining Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 346-380, November.
    33. Cameron, Lisa & Chaudhuri, Ananish & Erkal, Nisvan & Gangadharan, Lata, 2009. "Propensities to engage in and punish corrupt behavior: Experimental evidence from Australia, India, Indonesia and Singapore," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(7-8), pages 843-851, August.
    34. Roberto Weber & Colin Camerer, 2006. "“Behavioral experiments†in economics," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 9(3), pages 187-192, September.
    35. Berg Joyce & Dickhaut John & McCabe Kevin, 1995. "Trust, Reciprocity, and Social History," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 122-142, July.
    36. Daniel Read, 2005. "Monetary incentives, what are they good for?," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(2), pages 265-276.
    37. John L. Graham, 1985. "Cross-Cultural Marketing Negotiations: A Laboratory Experiment," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 4(2), pages 130-146.
    38. Hennig-Schmidt, Heike & Li, Zhu-Yu & Yang, Chaoliang, 2008. "Why people reject advantageous offers--Non-monotonic strategies in ultimatum bargaining: Evaluating a video experiment run in PR China," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 373-384, February.
    39. Joseph Henrich & Steve J. Heine & Ara Norenzayan, 2010. "The Weirdest People in the World?," Working Paper Series of the German Council for Social and Economic Data 139, German Council for Social and Economic Data (RatSWD).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:udedao:922013. 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: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.