Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-kw2vx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-07T18:46:38.067Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Guilt averse or reciprocal? Looking at behavioral motivations in the trust game

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Yola Engler ,
Rudolf Kerschbamer  and
Lionel Page Open the ORCID record for Lionel Page [Opens in a new window]
Yola Engler
Affiliation:
School of Economics and Finance, Queensland University of Technology and QuBE, Brisbane, Australia
Rudolf Kerschbamer
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
Lionel Page*
Affiliation:
School of Economics and Finance, Queensland University of Technology and QuBE, Brisbane, Australia
*
e-mail: lionel.page@qut.edu.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

For the trust game, recent models of belief-dependent motivations make opposite predictions regarding the correlation between back transfers and second-order beliefs of the trustor: while reciprocity models predict a negative correlation, guilt-aversion models predict a positive one. This paper tests the hypothesis that the inconclusive results in the previous studies investigating the reaction of trustees to their beliefs are due to the fact that reciprocity and guilt aversion are behaviorally relevant for different subgroups and that their impact cancels out in the aggregate. We find little evidence in support of this hypothesis and conclude that type heterogeneity is unlikely to explain previous results.

Keywords

Behavioral game theoryExperimentIntention based preferences

JEL classification

D63: Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement D64: Altruism • Philanthropy • Intergenerational Transfers C25: Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models • Discrete Regressors • Proportions • Probabilities C91: Laboratory, Individual Behavior C70: General
Type
Original Paper
Information
Journal of the Economic Science Association , Volume 4 , Issue 1 , July 2018 , pp. 1 - 14
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 Economic Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (https://doi.org/10.1007/s40881-018-0051-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

References

Al-Ubaydli, Omar, Lee, Min Sok. (2012). Do you reward and punish in the way you think others expect you to? The Journal of Socio-Economics, 41(3), 336–343. 10.1016/j.socec.2012.02.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Attanasi, Giuseppe, Battigalli, Pierpaolo, & Nagel, Rosemarie. (2017). Disclosure of belief-dependent preferences in a trust game. Working paper n. 506, IGIER Working Paper Series, Università Bocconi.Google Scholar
Bacharach, Michael, Guerra, Gerardo, Zizzo, Daniel John. (2007). The self-fulfilling property of trust: An experimental study. Theory and Decision, 63(4), 349–388. 10.1007/s11238-007-9043-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Battigalli, Pierpaolo, Dufwenberg, Martin. (2007). Guilt in games. American Economic Review, 97(2), 170–176. 10.1257/aer.97.2.170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bellemare, Charles, Sebald, Alexander, Strobel, Martin. (2011). Measuring the willingness to pay to avoid guilt: Estimation using equilibrium and stated belief models. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 26(3), 437–453. 10.1002/jae.1227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berg, Joyce, Dickhaut, John, McCabe, Kevin. (1995). Trust, reciprocity, and social history. Games and Economic Behavior, 10(1), 122–142. 10.1006/game.1995.1027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charness, Gary, Dufwenberg, Martin. (2006). Promises and partnership. Econometrica, 74(6), 1579–1601. 10.1111/j.1468-0262.2006.00719.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charness, Gary, Dufwenberg, Martin. (2011). Participation. American Economic Review, 101(4), 1211–1237. 10.1257/aer.101.4.1211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, James C., Servátka, Maroš, Vadovič, Radovan. (2010). Status quo effects in fairness games: reciprocal responses to acts of commission versus acts of omission. Experimental Economics, 20(1), 1–18. 10.1007/s10683-016-9477-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dufwenberg, Martin, Gneezy, Uri. (2000). Measuring beliefs in an experimental lost wallet game. Games and Economic Behavior, 30(2), 163–182. 10.1006/game.1999.0715CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dufwenberg, Martin, Kirchsteiger, Georg. (2004). A theory of sequential reciprocity. Games and Economic Behavior, 47(2), 268–298. 10.1016/j.geb.2003.06.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellingsen, Tore, Johannesson, Magnus, Tjøtta, Sigve, Torsvik, Gaute. (2010). Testing guilt aversion. Games and Economic Behavior, 68(1), 95–107. 10.1016/j.geb.2009.04.021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fleming, Piers, Zizzo, Daniel John. (2015). A simple stress test of experimenter demand effects. Theory and Decision, 78(2), 219–231. 10.1007/s11238-014-9419-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geanakoplos, John, Pearce, David, Stacchetti, Ennio. (1989). Psychological games and sequential rationality. Games and Economic Behavior, 1(1), 60–79. 10.1016/0899-8256(89)90005-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greiner, Ben. (2015). Subject pool recruitment procedures: organizing experiments with ORSEE. Journal of the Economic Science Association, 1(1), 114–125. 10.1007/s40881-015-0004-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guerra, Gerardo, Zizzo, Daniel. (2004). Trust responsiveness and beliefs. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 55(1), 25–30. 10.1016/j.jebo.2003.03.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, Glenn W., Rutström, E Elisabet. (2009). Expected utility theory and prospect theory: One wedding and a decent funeral. Experimental Economics, 12(2), 133–158. 10.1007/s10683-008-9203-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khalmetski, Kiryl, Ockenfels, Axel, Werner, Peter. (2015). Surprising gifts: Theory and laboratory evidence. Journal of Economic Theory, 159, 163–208. 10.1016/j.jet.2015.05.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rabin, Matthew. (1993). Incorporating fairness into game theory and economics. The American Economic Review, 83(5), 1281–1302.Google Scholar
Schaffner, Markus. (2013). Programming for experimental economics: Introducing corala lightweight framework for experimental economic experiments, QUT Business School: Tech. rept.Google Scholar
Sebald, Alexander. (2010). Attribution and reciprocity. Games and Economic Behavior, 68(1), 339–352. 10.1016/j.geb.2009.07.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strassmair, Christina. (2009). Can intentions spoil the kindness of a gift?-An experimental study, Munich discussion paper: Tech. rept.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Engler et al. supplementary material

Engler et al. supplementary material
Download Engler et al. supplementary material(File)
File 752.7 KB