On the Validity of Cost-Saving Methods in Dictator-Game Experiments: A Systematic Test

Walkowitz, Gari (2017): On the Validity of Cost-Saving Methods in Dictator-Game Experiments: A Systematic Test.

Abstract

Motivated by methodological concerns, theoretical considerations, and evidence from previous studies, this paper makes a contribution to conducting dictator-game experiments under resource constraints. Using a holistic and strictly controlled approach, we systematically assess the validity of common cost-saving dictator-game variants. We include five common approaches and compare them to a standard dictator game: involving fewer receivers than dictators; paying only some subjects or decisions; role uncertainty at the time of the transfer decision; a combination of random decision payment and role uncertainty. To test the validity of subjects’ dictator-game decisions, we relate them to complementary individual difference measures of generosity: social value orientation, personal values, and a donation to charity. In line with previous evidence, our data show that dictator behavior is quite sensitive to the applied methods. The standard version of the dictator game has the highest validity. Involving fewer receivers than dictators and not paying for all decisions yields comparably valid results. These methods may, therefore, represent feasible alternatives for the conduct of dictator games under contraints. By contrast, in the dictator-game variants where only some subjects are paid or where subjects face uncertainty about their final player role, the expected associations with other measures of generosity are distorted. Under role uncertainty, generosity is also biased upwards. We conclude that these methods are inappropriate when the researchers are interested in valid individual measures of generosity.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Dictator Game, Costs, Incentives, Unbalanced Matching, Random Payment, Role Uncertainty, Social Value Orientation, Personal Values, Donation, Methodology, Experiment
• Subjects: C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C7 - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory > C72 - Noncooperative Games; C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C9 - Design of Experiments > C91 - Laboratory, Individual Behavior; D - Microeconomics > D3 - Distribution

References

Andreoni, J. and B. D. Bernheim (2009). Social image and the 50-50 norm: A theoretical and experimental analysis of audience effects. Econometrica 77(5), 1607–1636.

Andreoni, J. and L. Vesterlund (2001). Which is the fair sex? gender differences in altruism. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 116(1), 293–312.

Ashraf, N., I. Bohnet, and N. Piankov (2006). Decomposing trust and trustworthiness. Experimental economics 9(3), 193–208.

Barr, A., A. Zeitlin, et al. (2010). Dictator games in the lab and in nature: External validity tested and investigated in ugandan primary schools. Technical report, Centre for the Study of African Economies, University of Oxford.

Batson, C. D., J. L. Dyck, J. R. Brandt, J. G. Batson, A. L. Powell, M. R. McMaster, and C. Griffitt (1988). Five studies testing two new egoistic alternatives to the empathy-altruism hypothesis. Journal of personality and social psychology 55(1), 52.

Batson, C. D., D. Kobrynowicz, J. L. Dinnerstein, H. C. Kampf, and A. D. Wilson (1997). In a very different voice: unmasking moral hypocrisy. Journal of personality and social psychology 72(6), 1335.

Ben-Ner, A., A. Kramer, and O. Levy (2008). Economic and hypothetical dictator game experiments: Incentive effects at the individual level. The Journal of Socio-Economics 37(5), 1775–1784.

Benz, M. and S. Meier (2008). Do people behave in experiments as in the field? - evidence from donations. Experimental economics 11(3), 268–281.

Bicchieri, C. (2006). The Grammar of Society: The nature and dynamics of social norms (1 ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Blanco, M., D. Engelmann, and H. T. Normann (2011). A within-subject analysis of other-regarding preferences. Games and Economic Behavior 72(2), 321–338.

Bolle, F. (1990). High reward experiments without high expenditure for the experimenter? Journal of Economic Psychology 11(2), 157–167.

Brandts, J. and G. Charness (2000). Hot vs. cold: Sequential responses and preference stability in experimental games. Experimental Economics 2(3), 227–238.

Bühren, C. and T. C. Kundt (2015). Imagine being a nice guy: A note on hypothetical vs. incentivized social preferences. Judgment and Decision Making 10(2), 185.

Burks, S. V., J. P. Carpenter, and E. Verhoogen (2003). Playing both roles in the trust game. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 51(2), 195–216.

Burnham, T., K. McCabe, and V. L. Smith (2000). Friend-or-foe intentionality priming in an extensive form trust game. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 43(1), 57–73.

Camerer, C. (2003). Behavioral game theory: Experiments in strategic interaction. Princeton University Press.

Camerer, C. F., R. M. Hogarth, D. V. Budescu, and C. Eckel (1999). The effects of financial incentives in experiments: A review and capital-labor-production framework. In Elicitation of Preferences, pp. 7–48. Springer.

Cappelen, A. W., A. D. Hole, E. O. Sorensen, and B. Tungodden (2007). The pluralism of fairness ideals: An experimental approach. The American Economic Review 97(3), 818–827.

Castillo, M. E. and P. J. Cross (2008). Of mice and men: Within gender variation in strategic behavior. Games and Economic Behavior 64(2), 421–432.

Charness, G. and M. Rabin (2002). Understanding social preferences with simple tests. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 117(3), 817–869.

Chuah, S.-H., R. Hoffmann, M. Jones, and G. Williams (2007). Do cultures clash? evidence from cross-national ultimatum game experiments. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 64(1), 35–48.

Cleave, B. L., N. Nikiforakis, and R. Slonim (2013). Is there selection bias in laboratory experiments? The case of social and risk preferences. Experimental Economics, 1–11.

Cornelissen, G., S. Dewitte, and L. Warlop (2011). Are social value orientations expressed automatically? decision making in the dictator game. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 37(8), 1080–1090.

Costa-Gomes, M. A. and G. Weizsäcker (2008). Stated beliefs and play in normal-form games. Review of Economic Studies 75(3), 729–762.

Cox, J. C. (2010). Some issues of methods, theories, and experimental designs. Journal of economic behavior & organization 73(1), 24–28.

Dalbert, C. and S. Umlauft (2009). The role of the justice motive in economic decision making. Journal of Economic Psychology 30(2), 172–180.

Dufwenberg, M. and A. Muren (2006). Generosity, anonymity, gender. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 61(1), 42–49.

Eckel, C. C. and P. J. Grossman (1998). Are women less selfish than men?: Evidence from dictator experiments. The economic journal 108(448), 726–735.

Eckel, C. C. and P. J. Grossman (2000). Volunteers and pseudo-volunteers: The effect of recruitment method in dictator experiments. Experimental Economics 3(2), 107–120.

Engel, C. (2011). Dictator games: a meta study. Experimental Economics 14(4), 583–610.

Engelmann, D. and M. Strobel (2004). Inequality aversion, efficiency, and maximin preferences in simple distribution experiments. The American Economic Review 94(4), 857–869.

Falk, A., A. Becker, T. J. Dohmen, D. Huffman, and U. Sunde (2016). The preference survey module: A validated instrument for measuring risk, time, and social preferences.

Falk, A. and J. J. Heckman (2009). Lab experiments are a major source of knowledge in the social sciences. Science 326(5952), 535–538.

Falk, A. and G. Walkowitz (2017). Employers discriminate against immigrants and criminal offenders - clean experimental evidence. University of Cologne Working Paper.

Fehr, E. and K. M. Schmidt (1999). A theory of fairness, competition, and cooperation. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 114(3), 817.

Fischbacher, U. (2007). z-tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments. Experimental Economics 10(2), 171–178.

Frank, R. H., T. Gilovich, and D. T. Regan (1993). Does studying economics inhibit cooperation? The Journal of Economic Perspectives 7(2), 159–171.

Franzen, A. and S. Pointner (2013). The external validity of giving in the dictator game. Experimental Economics 16(2), 155–169.

Gächter, S. and E. Renner (2010). The effects of (incentivized) belief elicitation in public goods experiments. Experimental Economics 13(3), 364–377.

Greiner, B. (2015). Subject pool recruitment procedures: Organizing experiments with ORSEE. Journal of the Economic Science Association 1(1), 114–125.

Güth, W., R. Schmittberger, and B. Schwarze (1982). An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 3, 367–388.

Henrich, J., R. Boyd, S. Bowles, C. Camerer, E. Fehr, H. Gintis, R. McElreath, M. Alvard, A. Barr, J. Ensminger, et al. (2005). "economic man" in cross-cultural perspective: Behavioral experiments in 15 small-scale societies. Behavioral and brain sciences 28(06), 795–815.

Holm, H. k. and P. Engseld (2005). Choosing bargaining partners - an experimental study on the impact of information about income, status and gender. Experimental Economics 8(3), 183–216.

Houser, D. and D. Schunk (2009). Social environments with competitive pressure: Gender effects in the decisions of german schoolchildren. Journal of Economic Psychology 30(4), 634–641.

Iriberri, N. and P. Rey-Biel (2011). The role of role uncertainty in modified dictator games. Experimental Economics 14(2), 160–180.

Kahneman, D., J. L. Knetsch, and R. H. Thaler (1986). Fairness and the assumptions of economics. Journal of Business 59(4), 285–300.

Laury, S. (2005). Pay one or pay all: Random selection of one choice for payment.

Levitt, S. D. and J. A. List (2007). What do laboratory experiments measuring social preferences reveal about the real world? The journal of economic perspectives 21(2), 153–174.

List, J. A. (2007). On the interpretation of giving in dictator games. Journal of Political Economy 115(3), 482–493.

Loewenstein, G., S. Issacharoff, C. Camerer, and L. Babcock (1993). Self-serving assessments of fairness and pretrial bargaining. Journal of Legal Studies 22, 135.

Lönnqvist, J.-E., M. Verkasalo, and G. Walkowitz (2011). It pays to pay–big five personality influences on co-operative behaviour in an incentivized and hypothetical prisoner’s dilemma game. Personality and Individual Differences 50(2), 300–304.

Lönnqvist, J.-E., M. Verkasalo, P. C. Wichardt, and G. Walkowitz (2013). Personal values and prosocial behaviour in strategic interactions: Distinguishing value-expressive from value-ambivalent behaviours. European Journal of Social Psychology 43(6), 554–569.

Matthey, A. and T. Regner (2013). On the independence of history: experience spill-overs between experiments. Theory and decision 75(3), 403–419.

Merritt, A. C., D. A. Effron, and B. Monin (2010). Moral self-licensing: When being good frees us to be bad. Social and personality psychology compass 4(5), 344–357.

Murphy, R. O. and K. A. Ackermann (2014). Social value orientation: Theoretical and measurement issues in the study of social preferences. Personality and Social Psychology Review 18(1), 13–41.

Ortmann, A. and R. Hertwig (2002). The costs of deception: Evidence from psychology. Experimental Economics 5(2), 111–131.

Rankin, F. W. (2006). Requests and social distance in dictator games. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 60(1), 27–36.

Roth, A. E., V. Prasnikar, M. Okuno-Fujiwara, and S. Zamir (1991). Bargaining and market behavior in jerusalem, ljubljana, pittsburgh, and tokyo: An experimental study. The American Economic Review 81(5), 1068–1095.

Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in experimental social psychology 25, 1–65.

Schwartz, S. H., J. Cieciuch, M. Vecchione, E. Davidov, R. Fischer, C. Beierlein, A. Ramos, M. Verkasalo, J.-E. Lönnqvist, K. Demirutku, et al. (2012). Refining the theory of basic individual values. Journal of personality and social psychology 103(4), 663.

Sefton, M. (1992). Incentives in simple bargaining games. Journal of Economic Psychology 13(2), 263–276.

Selten, R. (1967). Die Strategiemethode zur Erforschung des eingeschrï¿œnkt rationalen Verhaltens im Rahmen eines Oligopolexperiments, pp. 136–168. Tuebingen: J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck).

Smith, V. L. (1976). Experimental economics: Induced value theory. The American Economic Review 66(2), 274–279.

Smith, V. L. (2010). Theory and experiment: What are the questions? Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 73(1), 3–15.

Zizzo, D. J. (2010). Experimenter demand effects in economic experiments. Experimental Economics 13(1), 75–98.