L'influence de la connaissance du genre du partenaire dans les relations de confiance et de réciprocité: une étude expérimentale

Bonein, Aurélie and Serra, Daniel (2006): L'influence de la connaissance du genre du partenaire dans les relations de confiance et de réciprocité: une étude expérimentale.

Abstract

Gender differences are often observed in real life-situations. We implement an experiment on the investment game which explores the influence of knowledge of partner's gender in trust and reciprocity by means of two treatments of information: the first one, without knowledge of partner's gender and the second treatment where gender's partner is common knowledge. A great heterogeneity of individuals’ behaviors is observed: from selfish behavior to complete trust and trustworthiness. Knowledge of responder’s gender does not imply different sending, even if men trust more their partners than women. However, a phenomenon of gender bias dominates in trustworthiness behavior.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Institution: LAMETA
• English Title: Gender bias in trustworthiness
• Language: French
• Keywords: investment game; experiment; trust; reciprocity; gender
• Subjects: Z - Other Special Topics > Z1 - Cultural Economics ; Economic Sociology ; Economic Anthropology > Z13 - Economic Sociology ; Economic Anthropology ; Social and Economic Stratification; C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C9 - Design of Experiments > C91 - Laboratory, Individual Behavior; C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C0 - General; D - Microeconomics > D6 - Welfare Economics > D69 - Other; J - Labor and Demographic Economics > J1 - Demographic Economics > J16 - Economics of Gender ; Non-labor Discrimination

References

Andreoni, J., Vesterlund, L., 2001. Which is the fair sex? Quarterly Journal of Economics 116 (1), 293-312.

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

Berg, J., Dickhaut, J., Mc Cabe, K., 1995. Trust, reciprocity and social history. Games and Economic Behavior 10 (1), 122- 42.

Bohnet, I., 2006. Why women and men trust others. Working paper Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government.

Bolton, G.E., Katok, E., 1995. An experimental test of gender differences in beneficent behavior. Economics Letters 48 (3), 287-292.

Bolton, G.E., Ockenfels, A., 2000. ERC: A theory of equity, reciprocity and competition. American Economic Review 90(1), 166-193.

Buchan, N., Croson, R., Solnick, S.S., 2004. Trust and gender: an examination of behavior, biases, and beliefs in the Investment game. Working paper, University of Pennsylvania.

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

Carlsson, F., Daruval, D., Johansson-Stenman, O., 2005. Are people inequality-averse, or just risk-averse? Economica 72(3), 375-396.

Carpenter, J., Verhoogen, E., Burks, S., 2005. The effects of stakes in distribution experiments. Economics Letters 86(3), 393-398.

Chaudhuri, A., Gangaharan, L., 2006. An Experimental Analysis of Trust and Trustworthiness. Forthcoming in the Southern Economic Journal.

Croson, R., Buchan, N., 1999. Gender and culture: international experimental evidence from trust game. American Economic Review 89(2), 386-391.

Croson, R., Gneezy, U., 2006. An Experimental Analysis of Trust and Trustworthiness. Forthcoming in Journal of Economic Literature.

Dufwenberg, M., Gneezi, U., Güth, W., Van Damme, E., 2001. Direct versus indirect reciprocity: an experiment. Homo Oeconomicus 18(1), 19-30.

Dufwenberg, M., Muren, A., 2006. Gender composition in team. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 61(1), 50-54.

Eckel, C.C., Grossman, P., 1998. Are women less selfish than men: evidence form dictator experiments. Economic Journal 108(48), 726-735.

Eckel, C.C.,Grossman, P., 2001. Chivalry and solidarity in ultimatum games. Economic Inquiry 39(2), 171-188.

Eckel, C.C., Wilson, R.K., 2004. Conditional trust: sex, race and facial expressions in a trust game. Working paper, Virginia tech and Rice University.

Eckel, C.C., Wilson, R.K., 2005. Detecting trustworthiness: does beauty confound intuition? Unpublished manuscript, department of economics, Virginia tech and Rice University.

Fehr, E., Schmidt, K., 1999. A theory of fairness, competition, and cooperation. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 114(3), 817-868.

Fehr, E., Naef, M.,Schmidt, K., 2005. The role of equality, efficiency, and rawlsian motives in social preferences: a reply to Englemann and Strobel. Forthcoming in American Economic Review.

Freshtman, C., Gneezy, U., 2001. Discrimination in a segmented society: an experimental approach. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 116(1), 351-377.

Gilligan, C., 1982. In a different voice: Psychological theory and women's development. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA.

Gneezy, U., Güth, W., Verboven, F., 2000. Presents or investment? An experimental analysis. Journal of Economic Psychology 21, 481-493.

Güth, W., Schmittberger, R., Schwarze, B., 1982. An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 3(4), 367- 88.

Innocenti, A., Pazienza, M-G., 2006. Altruism and gender in the trust game. Working paper 5/2006, University of Siena.

Kahn, A., Hottes, J., Davis, W.L., 1971. Cooperation and optimal responding in the prisoner's dilemma game: effects of sex and physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 17(3), 267-279.

Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J.L., Thaler, R., 1986. Fairness and the assumption of economics. Journal of Business 59 (4), 285-300. Knack, S., Keefer, P., 1997. Does social capital have an economic payoff? A cross country investigation. Quarterly Journal of Economics 112(4), 1251-1288. Laury.S., 2005. Pay one or pay all: random selection of one choice for payment. Andrew Young School of policy studies, working paper 06-13. Lohman, C., Usunier, J.C., Willinger, M., 2001. Une comparaison franco-allemande de la confiance et de la réciprocité. Revue d’économie politique 111(1), 151-172.

Menkel-Meadow, C., 2000. Teaching about gender and negotiation: Sex, truths, and videotape. Negotiation Journal 16(4), 357-375.

Montet, C. and Serra. D., 2003: Game Theory and Economics, London: Palgrave Orbell, J., Dawes, R., Schwartz-Shea, P., 1994. Trust, social categories, and individuals: the case of gender. Motivation and Emotion 18(2), 109-128. Rabin, M., 1993. Incorporating fairness into games theory and economics. American Economic Review 83(5), 1281-1302.

Rapoport, A., Chammah, M., 1965. Sex differences in factors contributing to the level of cooperation in the Prisoner's dilemma game. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2(6), 831-838.

Scharleman, J.P.W., Eckel, C.C., Kacelnik, A., Wilson, R.K., 2001. The value of a smile: game theory with a human face. Journal of Economic Psychology 22(5), 617-640.

Schwieren, C., Sutter, M., 2004. Trust in cooperation or ability? An experimental study on gender differences. Working paper Max Planch Institute for research into Economics System, Jena

Selten, R., 1967. Die Strategiemethode zur Erforschung des Eingeschänkt Rationalen Verhaltens im Rahmen eines Oligopolexperiments, in H. Sauermann,ed, Beiträge zur Experimentellen Wirstschafsforschung. J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck) Tübingen, 136-168

Slonim, R., 2005. Gender selection discrimination: evidence from a trust game. Working paper Case Western Reserve University.

Solnick, S.J., 2001. Gender differences in the ultimatum game. Economic Inquiry 39(2), 189-200.

Solnick, S.J., Schweitzer, M.E., 1999. The influence of physical attractiveness and gender on ultimatum game decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process 79(3), 199-215.

Sutter, M., Bosman, R., Kocher, M., Van Winden, F., 2006. Gender pairing and bargaining - Beware the same sex! Working paper University of Cologne.

Tedeschi, J.T., Hiester, D., Gahagan. J., 1969. Trust and the prisoner's dilemma game. Journal of Social Psychology 79, 43-50.

Veblen, T., 1934. Essays in our changing order. Leon Ardzroomi, Viking press, New york