Epistemic Conditions and Social Preferences in Trust Games

Gillies, Anthony S and Rigdon, Mary L (2008): Epistemic Conditions and Social Preferences in Trust Games.

Abstract

It is well-known that subjects in bilateral bargaining experiments often exhibit choice behavior suggesting there are strong reciprocators in the population. But it is controversial whether explaining this data requires a social preference model that invokes genuine strong reciprocity or whether some social preference model built on other-regarding preferences as a surrogate can explain it. Since the data precedes theory here, all the social preference models agree on most of it — making direct tests more difficult. We report results from a laboratory experiment using a novel method for testing between the classes of social preference models in the trust game that manipulates the distribution of payoff information in the game. We find evidence supporting the strong reciprocity hypothesis.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: social preferences, trust game, reciprocity, strong reciprocators
• Subjects: C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C7 - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory > C70 - General; C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C9 - Design of Experiments > C91 - Laboratory, Individual Behavior

References

Ashraf, N. I. Bohnet and N. Piankov (2006). “Decomposing Trust and Trustwor- thiness," Experimental Economics 9:193–208. Aumann, R. and A. Brandenburger (1995). “Epistemic Conditions for Nash Equi- librium," Econometrica 63: 1161–1180. Reprinted in: R. J. Aumann, Collected Papers, vol. 1 (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2000). Berg, J., J. Dickhaut, and K. McCabe (1995). “Trust, Reciprocity, and Social History," Games and Economic Behavior 10: 122–142. Bohnet, I. and R. Zeckhauser (2004). “Trust, Risk, and Betrayal," Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 55(4): 464–484. Bolton, G. and A. Ockenfels (2000). “ERC: A Theory of Equity, Reciprocity, and Competition" American Economic Review 90(1): 166–193. Bowles, S. and H. Gintis (2003). “Origins of Human Cooperation," in P. Hammer- stein (ed.), Genetic and Cultural Evolution of Cooperation (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), pp. 429–443. Brandts, J. and G. Charness (2000). “Hot vs. Cold: Sequential Responses and Preference Stability in Experimental Games," Experimental Economics 2: 227– 238. Camerer, C. F. (2003). Behavioral Game Theory (Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univer- sity Press). Casari, M. and T. N. Cason (2008). “The Strategy Method Biases Measured Trustworthy Behavior," Working Paper, Purdue University. Cason, T. and V. Mui, (1998). “Social Influence in the Sequential Dictator Game," Journal of Mathematical Psychology 42: 248–265. Charness, G. and M. Rabin (2002). “Understanding Social Preferences With Simple Tests," The Quarterly Journal of Economics 117(3): 817–869. Cox, J. C., D. Friedman and V. Sadiraj (in press). “Revealed Altruism," Economet- rica 76(1): 31–69. Dufwenberg, M. and G. Kirchsteiger (2004). “A Theory of Sequential Reciprocity," Games and Economic Behavior 47(2): 268–298.

Falk, A. and U. Fischbacher (2005). “Modeling Strong Reciprocity," in H. Gintis, S. Bowles, R. Boyd, and E. Fehr (eds.) Moral Sentiments and Material Interests (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press). Falk, A., E. Fehr, and U. Fischbacher (2003). “On the Nature of Fair Behavior," Economic Inquiry 41(1), 20–26. Fehr, E. and U. Fischbacher (2005). “The Economics of Strong Reciprocity," in H. Gintis, S. Bowles, R. Boyd, and E. Fehr (eds.) Moral Sentiments and Material Interests (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press). Fehr, E. and K. M. Schmidt (1999). “A Theory of Fairness, Competition, and Cooperation," Quarterly Journal of Economics 114(3): 817–868. Gintis, H. (2000). “Strong Reciprocity and Human Sociality,” Journal of Theoreti- cal Biology 206: 169–179. Güth, W., Schmittberger, and Schwarze (1982). “An Experimental Analysis of Ultimatum Bargaining," Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 3(4): 367–388. Houser, D. and E. Xiao (2003). “Emotion Expression in Human Punishment Behavior," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 102(20): 7398– 7401. Levine, D. (1998). “Modeling Altruism and Spitefulness in Experiments,” Review of Economics Dynamics 1: 591–622. McCabe, K., S. Rassenti, and V. Smith (1996). “Reciprocity, Trust, and Payoff Privacy in Extensive Form Bargaining," Games and Economic Behavior 24: 10–24. McCabe, K., M. Rigdon, and V. Smith (2002). “Cooperation in Single Play, Two- Person Extensive Form Games between Anonymously Matched Players," in R. Zwick and A. Rapoport (eds.), Experimental Business Research, (Boston, MA: Kluwer), pp.49–67. McCabe, K., M. Rigdon, and V. Smith (2003). “Positive Reciprocity and Intentions in Trust Games," Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 52(2): 267– 275. McCabe, K. and V. Smith (2000a). “A Two-person Trust Game Played by Naïve and Sophisticated Subjects," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 97(7): 3777–3781. McCabe, K., Smith, V., LePore, M., 2000. Intentionality Detection and ‘Mindread- ing’: Why Does Game Form Matter? Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 97(8), 4404–4409. McCabe, K. and V. Smith (2000b). “Goodwill Accounting in Economic Exchange," in G. Gigerenzer and R. Selten (eds.), Bounded Rationality: The Adaptive Toolbox (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press). Oxoby, R. and K. McLeish (2004). “Sequential Decision and Strategy Vector Meth- ods in Ultimatum Bargaining: Evidence on the Strength of Other-regarding Behavior," Economics Letters 84: 399–405. Ortmann, A., J. Fitzgerald, and C. Boeing (2000). “Trust, Reciprocity, and Social History: A Re-examination," Experimental Economics 3(1): 81–100. Oosterbeek, H., R. Sloof, and G. van de Kuilen (2004). “Differences in Ultimatum Game Experiments: Evidence from a Meta-Analysis," Experimental Economics 7: 171–188. Rigdon, M. (2008). “Trust and Reciprocity in Incentive Contracting,” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, in press. Smith, V. (2008). Rationality in Economics: Constructivist and Ecological Forms New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Smith, V. (1962). “An Experimental Study of Competitive Market Behavior," The Journal of Political Economy 70(2): 111–137. Solnick, S. (2007). “Cash and Alternate Methods of Accounting in an Experimen- tal Game," Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 62: 316–321.