Cost of action, perceived intention, positive reciprocity, and signalling model

Bhirombhakdi, Kornpob and Potipiti, Tanapong (2012): Cost of action, perceived intention, positive reciprocity, and signalling model.

Abstract

This study experimentally tests the positive relationship between perceived intention and positive reciprocity by altering material-payoff structures. To design the treatments, we apply a signalling model to explain how the intention of an action is signalled and perceived. The model shows that the cost of an action positively relates to the perceived intention. The results from seventy-nine subjects who participated in this four-session hand-run experiment that was double-blindly organized between August - September 2011 support the positive relationship. Moreover, this study hypothesizes on consistent decisions across treatments with different levels of perceived intention, and the results support the hypotheses.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Behavioral economics, reciprocity, asymmetric information
• Subjects: C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C7 - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory > C71 - Cooperative Games; D - Microeconomics > D8 - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty > D82 - Asymmetric and Private Information ; Mechanism Design; C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C9 - Design of Experiments > C91 - Laboratory, Individual Behavior

References

Bhirombhakdi, K. 2011. "Performance of a reciprocity model in predicting a positive reciprocity decision", proceedings of International Conference on Management, Economics and Social Sciences (ICMESS'2011), pp. 504-508.

Bolton, G.E. & Ockenfels, A. 2000. "ERC: A theory of equity, reciprocity, and competition", The American Economic Review, vol. 90, no. 1, pp. 166-193.

Bolton, G.E. & Ockenfels, A. 2005. "A stress test of fairness measures in models of social utility", Economic Theory, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 957-982.

Charness, G. & Rabin, M. 2002. "Understanding social preferences with simple tests", The Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 117, no. 3, pp. 817-869.

Cox, J.C. & Deck, C.A. 2005. "On the nature of reciprocal motives", Economic Inquiry, vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 623-635.

Dufwenberg, M. & Kirchsteiger, G. 2004. "A theory of sequential reciprocity", Games and Economic Behavior, vol. 47, pp. 268-298.

Falk, A. & Fischbacher, U. 2006. "A theory of reciprocity", Games and Economic Behavior, vol. 54, pp. 293-315.

Falk, A., Fehr, E. & Fischbacher, U. 2003. "On the nature of fair behavior", Economic Inquiry, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 20-26.

Falk, A., Fehr, E. & Fischbacher, U. 2008. "Testing theories of fairness- Intentions matter", Games and Economic Behavior, vol. 62, pp. 287-303.

Fehr, E. & Schmidt, K.M. 1999. "A theory of fairness, competition, and cooperation", The Quarterly Journal of Economics, pp. 817-868.

Geanakoplos, J., Pearce, D. & Stacchetti, E. 1999. "Psychological games and sequential rationality", Games and Economic Behavior, vol. 1, pp. 60-79.

McCabe, K.A., Rigdon, M.L. & Smith, V.L. 2003. "Positive reciprocity and intentions in trust games", Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, vol. 52, pp. 267-275.

Morrison, W.G. & Rutström, E. 2002. "The role of beliefs in an investment game experiment", Mimeo, University of South Carolina.

Stanca, L., Bruni, L. & Corazzini, L. 2009. "Testing theories of reciprocity: Do motivations matter?", Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, vol. 71, no. 2, pp. 233- 245.