Deeds rather than omissions: How intended consequences provoke negative reciprocity
Intention-based models of reciprocity argue that people assess kindness by measuring the intended consequences of actual behavior (deeds) against foregone payoffs resulting from unchosen alternatives (omissions). While the effects of omissions have been intensively studied in recent years, less has been done with respect to the impact of deeds on reciprocation. I employ a novel game that alters the intended consequences behind actual behavior at constant levels of unchosen alternatives and realized payoffs. Aggregate results suggest that intended consequences only weakly matter for negative reciprocity. I find men to abstain from retaliation when others intend to mildly harm them. Women, however, seem to be largely invariant to intended consequences of actual behavior.
|Date of creation:||2012|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: 94030 Passau|
Phone: ++49 (0)851 509 0
Fax: ++49 (0)851 509 1005
Web page: http://www.wiwi.uni-passau.de/index.php?L=2
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.:
- Sutter, Matthias, 2007.
"Outcomes versus intentions: On the nature of fair behavior and its development with age,"
Journal of Economic Psychology,
Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 69-78, January.
- Matthias Sutter, 2007. "Outcomes versus intentions. on the nature of fair behavior and its development with age," Artefactual Field Experiments 00109, The Field Experiments Website.
- Matthew Rabin., 1992.
"Incorporating Fairness into Game Theory and Economics,"
Economics Working Papers
92-199, University of California at Berkeley.
- Rabin, Matthew, 1993. "Incorporating Fairness into Game Theory and Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(5), pages 1281-1302, December.
- M. Rabin, 2001. "Incorporating Fairness into Game Theory and Economics," Levine's Working Paper Archive 511, David K. Levine.
- Zephyr, 2010. "The city," City, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1-2), pages 154-155, February.
- Eckel, Catherine C & Grossman, Philip J, 2001. "Chivalry and Solidarity in Ultimatum Games," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 39(2), pages 171-88, April.
- Stanca, Luca & Bruni, Luigino & Corazzini, Luca, 2009.
"Testing theories of reciprocity: Do motivations matter?,"
Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization,
Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 233-245, August.
- Luca Stanca & Luigino Bruni & Luca Corazzini, 2009. "Testing Theories of Reciprocity: Do Motivations Matter?," Post-Print hal-00693819, HAL.
- Luca Stanca & Luigino Bruni & Luca Corazzini, 2007. "Testing Theories of Reciprocity: Do Motivations Matter?," Working Papers 109, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised 2007.
- James C. Cox & Daniel Friedman & Steven Gjerstad, 2006.
"A Tractable Model of Reciprocity and Fairness,"
Experimental Economics Center Working Paper Series
2006-05, Experimental Economics Center, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
- James Cox & Daniel Friedman & Steven Gjerstad, 2004. "A Tractable Model of Reciprocity and Fairness," Experimental 0406001, EconWPA.
- Cox, J. & Friedman, D. & Gjerstad, S., 2006. "A Trackable Model of Reciprocity and Fairness," Purdue University Economics Working Papers 1181, Purdue University, Department of Economics.
- Brandts, J. & Sola, C., 1998.
"Reference Points and Negative Reciprocity in Simple Sequential Games,"
UFAE and IAE Working Papers
425.98, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC).
- Brandts, Jordi & Sola, Carles, 2001. "Reference Points and Negative Reciprocity in Simple Sequential Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 138-157, August.
- Gary Bolton & Axel Ockenfels, 2005.
"A stress test of fairness measures in models of social utility,"
Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 25(4), pages 957-982, 06.
- Gary E. Bolton & Axel Ockenfels, 2002. "A stress test of fairness measures in models of social utility," Papers on Strategic Interaction 2002-29, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group.
- Dufwenberg, M. & Kirchsteiger, G., 1998.
"A Theory of Sequential Reciprocity,"
1998-37, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
- Margin Dufwenberg & Georg Kirchsteiger, 2001. "A Theory of Sequential Reciprocity," Levine's Working Paper Archive 563824000000000090, David K. Levine.
- Georg Kirchsteiger & Martin Dufwenberg, 2004. "A theory of sequential reciprocity," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/5899, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
- Lambsdorff, Johann Graf & Frank, Björn, 2011. "Corrupt reciprocity - Experimental evidence on a men's game," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 116-125, June.
- Eckel, Catherine C. & Grossman, Philip J., 1996. "The relative price of fairness: gender differences in a punishment game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 143-158, August.
- Falk, Armin & Fischbacher, Urs, 2001.
"A Theory of Reciprocity,"
CEPR Discussion Papers
3014, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Andreoni, James & Vesterlund, Lise, 2001.
"Which is the Fair Sex? Gender Differences in Altruism,"
Staff General Research Papers
1951, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
- James Andreoni & Lise Vesterlund, 2001. "Which is the Fair Sex? Gender Differences in Altruism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 116(1), pages 293-312.
- Andreoni,J. & Vesterlund,L., 1998. "Which is the fair sex? : Gender differences in altruism," Working papers 10, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
- Schubert, Manuel & Graf Lambsdorff, Johann, 2012. "On the costs of kindness: An experimental investigation of guilty minds and negative reciprocity," Passauer Diskussionspapiere, Volkswirtschaftliche Reihe V-64-12, University of Passau, Faculty of Business and Economics.
- Falk, Armin & Fehr, Ernst & Fischbacher, Urs, 2001.
"On the Nature of Fair Behaviour,"
CEPR Discussion Papers
2984, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Guth, Werner & Huck, Steffen & Muller, Wieland, 2001. "The Relevance of Equal Splits in Ultimatum Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 161-169, October.
- Gary Charness & David I. Levine, 2007. "Intention and Stochastic Outcomes: An Experimental study," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 117(522), pages 1051-1072, 07.
- Solnick, Sara J, 2001. "Gender Differences in the Ultimatum Game," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 39(2), pages 189-200, April.
- Urs Fischbacher, 2007. "z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 171-178, June.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:upadvr:v6512. 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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.