Hostname: page-component-669899f699-g7b4s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-26T18:42:40.802Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Private lives: experimental evidence on information completeness in spousal preferences

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 January 2025

Anirudh Tagat Open the ORCID record for Anirudh Tagat [Opens in a new window] ,
Hansika Kapoor  and
Savita Kulkarni
Anirudh Tagat*
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, Monk Prayogshala, 4114, Oberoi Garden Estates C Wing, Andheri (East), Mumbai, Maharashtra 400072, India
Hansika Kapoor
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Monk Prayogshala, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
Savita Kulkarni
Affiliation:
Gokhale Institute of Politics and Economics, Pune, India
*
e-mail: at@monkprayogshala.in
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Experimental work using real married couples has shown that efficiency in intra-household allocations is influenced by information asymmetry between spouses. We conduct a lab-in-the-field experiment in rural India to test the extent to which lack of complete information on spousal preferences related to a bundle of private goods can affect allocation dynamics as well as expectations about allocations. We first show that there exist information asymmetries in spousal preferences, and that our information intervention helps reduce gendered misperception in beliefs about allocations and actual allocations, especially for men. However, information on spousal preferences does not significantly affect the final allocation decision, suggesting that husbands and wives may be responding to existing gender norms. We outline implications for experimental work on intra-household bargaining, and for policy.

Keywords

Information asymmetryBeliefsIntra-household bargainingIndia

JEL classification

D13: Household Production and Intrahousehold Allocation C93: Field Experiments D82: Asymmetric and Private Information • Mechanism Design
Type
Original Paper
Information
Journal of the Economic Science Association , Volume 10 , Issue 1 , June 2024 , pp. 62 - 75
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Economic Science Association 2023.

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Adenzato, M., Brambilla, M., Manenti, R., De Lucia, L., Trojano, L., Garofalo, S., Enrici, I., Cotelli, M. (2017). Gender differences in cognitive theory of mind revealed by transcranial direct current stimulation on medial prefrontal cortex. Scientific Reports, 7(1),41219. 10.1038/srep41219CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Afzal, U., D’Adda, G., Fafchamps, M., Said, F. (2022). Intrahousehold consumption allocation and demand for agency: A triple experimental investigation. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 14(3), 400–444. 10.1257/app.20200672Google Scholar
Ambler, K., Doss, C., Kieran, C., Passarelli, S. (2019). He says, she says: Spousal disagreement in survey measures of bargaining power. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 10.1086/703082Google Scholar
Ashraf, N. (2009). Spousal control and intra-household decision making: An experimental study in the Philippines. American Economic Review, 99(4), 1245–1277. 10.1257/aer.99.4.1245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Augsburg, B., Malde, B., Olorenshaw, H., Wahhaj, Z. (2023). To invest or not to invest in sanitation: The role of intra-household gender differences in perceptions and bargaining power. Journal of Development Economics, 162(November 2021), 10.1016/j.jdeveco.2023.103074CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baland, J.-M., Ziparo, R., & Anderson, S., Beaman, L., Platteau, J.-P. (2018). Intra-household bargaining in poor countries Towards gender equity in development, Oxford University Press 70–96.Google Scholar
Basu, K. (2006). Gender and say: A model of household behaviour with endogenously determined balance of power. The Economic Journal, 116(511), 558–580. 10.1111/j.1468-0297.2006.01092.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beblo, M., Beninger, D. (2016). Do husbands and wives pool their incomes? A couple experiment. Review of Economics of the Household, 10.1007/s11150-016-9342-0Google Scholar
Browning, M., Chiappori, P.-A. (1998). Efficient intra-household allocations: A general characterization and empirical tests. Econometrica, 66(6),1241. 10.2307/2999616CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castilla, C. (2019). What’s yours is mine, and what’s mine is mine: Field experiment on income concealing between spouses in India. Journal of Development Economics, 137(January 2017), 125–140. 10.1016/j.jdeveco.2018.11.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castilla, C., Masuda, Y., Zhang, W. (2022). Intra-household allocation, beliefs, and communication between spouses in Kenya. SSRN Electronic Journal, 10.2139/ssrn.4291607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castilla, C., Walker, T. (2013). Is ignorance bliss? The effect of asymmetric information between spouses on intra-household allocations. American Economic Review, 103(3), 263–268. 10.1257/aer.103.3.263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cochard, F., Couprie, H., Hopfensitz, A. (2016). Do spouses cooperate? An experimental investigation. Review of Economics of the Household, 14(1), 1–26. 10.1007/s11150-014-9276-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Couprie, H., Cudeville, E., Sofer, C. (2020). Efficiency versus gender roles and stereotypes: An experiment in domestic production. Experimental Economics, 23(1), 181–211. 10.1007/s10683-019-09612-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Rock, B., Potoms, T., Tommasi, D. (2022). Household responses to cash transfers. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 70(2), 625–652. 10.1086/713539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doepke, M., Tertilt, M. (2019). Does female empowerment promote economic development? Journal of Economic Growth, 24(4), 309–343. 10.1007/s10887-019-09172-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duflo, E. (2003). Grandmothers and granddaughters: Old-age pensions and intrahousehold allocation in South Africa. The World Bank Economic Review, 17(1), 1–25. 10.1093/wber/lhg013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fletschner, D., Mesbah, D. (2011). Gender disparity in access to information: Do spouses share what they know? World Development, 39(8), 1422–1433. 10.1016/j.worlddev.2010.12.014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoel, J. B. (2015). Heterogeneous households: A within-subject test of asymmetric information between spouses in Kenya. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 118(October), 123–135. 10.1016/j.jebo.2015.02.016CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Iversen, V., Jackson, C., Kebede, B., Munro, A., Verschoor, A. (2011). Do spouses realise cooperative gains? Experimental evidence from rural Uganda. World Development, 39(4), 569–578. 10.1016/j.worlddev.2010.09.011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jejeebhoy, S. J., Sathar, Z. A. (2001). Women’s autonomy in India and Pakistan: The influence of religion and region. Population and Development Review, 27(4), 687–712. 10.1111/j.1728-4457.2001.00687.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mani, A. (2011). Mine, yours or ours? The efficiency of household investment decisions: An experimental approach. 64. CAGE Online Working Paper Series. Coventry. http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/57668.Google Scholar
McHugh, M. L. (2013). The chi-square test of independence. Biochemia Medica, 23(2), 143–149. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23894860.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Munro, A. (2017). Intra-household experiments: A survey. Journal of Economic Surveys, 10.1111/joes.12196Google Scholar
Munro, A., Kebede, B., Tarazona-Gomez, M., Verschoor, A. (2014). Autonomy and efficiency: An experiment on household decisions in two regions of India. Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, 33, 114–133. 10.1016/j.jjie.2013.10.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muthoo, A. (1992). Revocable commitment and sequential bargaining. The Economic Journal, 102(March), 378–387. 10.2307/2234522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muthoo, A. (1996). A bargaining model based on the commitment tactic. Journal of Economic Theory, 69(1), 134–152. 10.1006/jeth.1996.0041CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ridinger, G., McBride, M. (2015). Money affects theory of mind differently by gender.” Edited by Nico W. Van Yperen. PLoS ONE, 10(12), 10.1371/journal.pone.0143973CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sarkar, S., Bose, A. S. (2018). Partially altruistic choice in presence of consensus bias. Journal of Quantitative Economics, 16(3), 853–861. 10.1007/s40953-018-0117-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van den Bold, M., Quisumbing, A. R., & Gillespie, S. (2013). Women’s empowerment and nutrition: An evidence review. 01294. IFPRI Discussion Paper. IFPRI Discussion Paper. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2343160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Tagat et al. supplementary material

Tagat et al. supplementary material
Download Tagat et al. supplementary material(File)
File 310.9 KB