Selfish in the End?:An Investigation of Consistency and Stability of individual Behavior

Brosig, Jeannette and Riechmann, Thomas and Weimann, Joachim (2007): Selfish in the End?:An Investigation of Consistency and Stability of individual Behavior. Published in: FEMM Working Paper Series No. 05/2007 (February 2007): pp. 1-33.

Abstract

This paper puts three of the most prominent specifications of ‘other-regarding’ preferences to the experimental test, namely the theories developed by Charness and Rabin, by Fehr and Schmidt, and by Andreoni and Miller. In a series of experiments based on various dictator and prisoner’s dilemma games, we try to uncover which of these concepts, or the classical selfishapproach, is able to explain most of our experimental findings. The experiments are special with regard to two aspects: First, we investigate the consistency of individual behavior within and across different classes of games. Second, we analyze the stability of individual behavior over time by running the same experiments on the same subjects at several points in time. Our results demonstrate that in the first wave of experiments, all theories of other-regarding preferences explain a high share of individual decisions. Other-regarding preferences seem to wash out over time, however. In the final wave, it is the classical theory of selfish behaviorthat delivers the best explanation. Stable behavior over time is observed only for subjects, who behave strictly selfish. Most subjects behave consistently with regard to at least one of the theories within the same class of games, but are much less consistent across games.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Institution: University of Magdeburg
• Language: English
• Keywords: individual preferences; consistency; stability; experimental economics
• Subjects: C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C9 - Design of Experiments > C90 - General; C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C9 - Design of Experiments > C91 - Laboratory, Individual Behavior; C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C7 - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory > C72 - Noncooperative Games

References

Andreoni, J., Castillo, M., Petrie, R. (2003). “What do Bargainers’ Preferences Look Like? Exploring a Convex Ultimatum Game.” American Economic Review 93, 672-685. Andreoni, J., Miller, J. H. (2002). “Giving According to GARP: An Experimental Test of the Consistency of Preferences for Altruism.” Econometrica 70, 737-753. Blanco, M., Engelmann, D., Normann, H.-T. (2006). “A Within-Subject Analysis of Other- Regarding Preferences.” Working Paper. Bolton, G. E., Ockenfels A. (2000). “ERC: A Theory of Equity, Reciprocity and Competition.” American Economic Review 90, 166-193. Charness, G., Rabin, M. (2002). “Understanding Social Preferences with Simple Tests.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 117, 817-869. Dufwenberg, M., Kirchsteiger, G. (2004). “A Theory of Sequential Reciprocity”, Games and Economic Behavior 47, 268-298. Falk, A., Fischbacher, U. (2006) “A Theory of Reciprocity.” Games and Economic Behavior 54, 293-316. Fehr, E., Schmidt, K. M. (1999). “A theory of Fairness, Competition and Cooperation.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 114, 817-868. Fischbacher, U. (1999). “z-Tree - Zurich Toolbox for Readymade Economic Experiments - Experimenter’s Manual.” Working Paper Nr. 21, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics, University of Zurich. Fischbacher, U., Gächter, S. (2006). “Heterogeneous Social Preferences and the Dynamics of Free-Riding in Public Goods.” CeDEx Discussion Paper No. 2006-01, University of Nottingham. Flood, M. M. (1952). “Some Experimental Games.” Research Memorandum RM–789, RAND Corporation. Flood, M. M. (1958). “Some Experimental Games.” Management Science 5, 5-26. Forsythe R., Horowitz J. L., Savin N. E., Sefton M. (1994). “Fairness in Simple Bargaining Experiments.” Games and Economic Behavior 6, 347-369. Geanakoplos, J., Pearse, D., Stacchetti, E. (1989). “Psychological Games and Sequential Rationality”, Games and Economic Behavior 1, 60-80. Isaac, R. M., McCue, K. F., C. R. Plott (1985). “Public Goods Provision in an Experimental Environment.” Journal of Public Economics 26, 51-74. Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J., Thaler, R. (1986). “Fairness and the Assumptions of Economics.” Journal of Business 59, S285-S300. Kim, O., Walker, M. (1984). “The Free Rider Problem: Experimental Evidence.” Public Choice 43, 3-24. Levine, D. (1998). “Modelling Altruism and Spitefulness in Experiments.” Review of Economic Dynamics 1, 593-622. Rabin, M. (1993). “Incorporating Fairness into Game Theory and Economics”, American Economic Review 83, 1281-1302.