IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/beh/jbepv1/v7y2023i2p21-32.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How can technologies help disclose new insights into collective behaviors?

Author

Listed:
  • Sara Gil-Gallen and Anne-Gaëlle Maltese

    (BETA - Université de Strasbourg, France)

Abstract

Technologies increasingly shape our lives but also how research is done. Nowadays, we can use complex technological tools to examine unexplored research territories. In this regard, we focus in this work on collective experiments involving direct social interactions without systematic intermediaries. The contribution of this paper is twofold. First, we remark on the importance of studying collective processes, which are still scarcely considered in the existing experimental literature in economics, and the multimodal use of technological tools to study those processes in a controlled environment. Second, we bring a greater focus on the tools themselves, their characteristics, and their wearability. With this, we highlight the importance of the collaboration of economics in multidisciplinary projects, e.g., with psychology or engineering. We also highlight the potential of collective experiments and the importance of integrating technologies into the experimental methodology, at the same time acknowledging the existing barriers and limitations in studying such complex phenomena.

Suggested Citation

  • Sara Gil-Gallen and Anne-Gaëlle Maltese, 2023. "How can technologies help disclose new insights into collective behaviors?," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 7(2), pages 21-32, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:beh:jbepv1:v:7:y:2023:i:2:p:21-32
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://sabeconomics.org/journal/RePEc/beh/JBEPv1/articles/JBEP-7-2-2.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Timothy N. Cason & Daniel Friedman, 1997. "Price Formation in Single Call Markets," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(2), pages 311-346, March.
    2. Andreoni, James, 1995. "Cooperation in Public-Goods Experiments: Kindness or Confusion?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(4), pages 891-904, September.
    3. Nicolas Jacquemet & Olivier L'Haridon, 2018. "Experimental Economics. Method and Applications," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-02303376, HAL.
    4. List John A., 2007. "Field Experiments: A Bridge between Lab and Naturally Occurring Data," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 6(2), pages 1-47, April.
    5. Gary Charness & Daniela Grieco, 2023. "Creativity and Corporate Culture," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 133(653), pages 1846-1870.
    6. Gary Charness & Daniela Grieco, 2019. "Creativity and Incentives," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 17(2), pages 454-496.
    7. Anne-Gaëlle Maltese & Sara Gil-Gallen & Patrick Llerena, 2023. "Disentangling the role of surface and deep-level variables on individuals’ and groups’ creative performance: A cross-level experimental evidence," Working Papers of BETA 2023-19, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Catherine Eckel, 2005. "Subsidizing Charitable Contributions: A Field Test Comparing Matching and Rebate Subsidies," Working Papers 2098, The Field Experiments Website.
    2. Klaus Moeltner & James J. Murphy & John K. Stranlund & Maria Alejandra Velez, 2013. "Institutional heterogeneity in social dilemma games: a Bayesian examination," Chapters, in: John A. List & Michael K. Price (ed.), Handbook on Experimental Economics and the Environment, chapter 2, pages 67-88, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Artavia-Mora, L.D., 2016. "Intuitive cooperation in The Hague : A natural field experiment," ISS Working Papers - General Series 614, International Institute of Social Studies of Erasmus University Rotterdam (ISS), The Hague.
    4. Michela Chessa & Benjamin Prissé, 2024. "The Evaluation of Creativity," GREDEG Working Papers 2024-16, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    5. Giuseppe Attanasi & Ylenia Curci & Patrick Llerena & Maria del Pino Ramos-Sosa & Adriana Carolina Pinate & Giulia Urso, 2019. "Looking at Creativity from East to West: Risk Taking and Intrinsic Motivation in Socially and Culturally Diverse Countries," Working Papers of BETA 2019-38, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    6. Delaney, Jason & Jacobson, Sarah, 2014. "Those outsiders: How downstream externalities affect public good provision," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 67(3), pages 340-352.
    7. Cason, Timothy N. & Mui, Vai-Lam, 2005. "Uncertainty and resistance to reform in laboratory participation games," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 708-737, September.
    8. Sonnemans, Joep & Schram, Arthur & Offerman, Theo, 1998. "Public good provision and public bad prevention: The effect of framing," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 143-161, January.
    9. Kohei Nitta, 2014. "The Effect of Income Heterogeneity in An Experiment with Global and Local Public Goods," Working Papers 201403, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Department of Economics.
    10. Corgnet, Brice & Martin, Ludivine & Ndodjang, Peguy & Sutan, Angela, 2019. "On the merit of equal pay: Performance manipulation and incentive setting," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 23-45.
    11. Herbert Gintis, 2003. "Solving the Puzzle of Prosociality," Rationality and Society, , vol. 15(2), pages 155-187, May.
    12. Lohse, Johannes & Goeschl, Timo & Diederich , Johannes, 2014. "Giving is a question of time: Response times and contributions to a real world public good," Working Papers 0566, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    13. Kjetil Telle, 2012. "Monitoring and enforcement of environmental regulations. Lessons from a natural field experiment in Norway," Discussion Papers 680, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    14. Steven D. Levitt & John A. List, 2009. "Can Field Experiments Return Agricultural Economics to the Glory Days?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1259-1265.
    15. Galeotti, Fabio, 2015. "Do negative emotions explain punishment in power-to-take game experiments?," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 1-14.
    16. Mary F. Evans, 2016. "The Clean Air Act Watch List: An Enforcement and Compliance Natural Experiment," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 3(3), pages 627-665.
    17. Maarten J. Voors & Eleonora E. M. Nillesen & Philip Verwimp & Erwin H. Bulte & Robert Lensink & Daan P. Van Soest, 2012. "Violent Conflict and Behavior: A Field Experiment in Burundi," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(2), pages 941-964, April.
    18. Anauati, María Victoria & Feld, Brian & Galiani, Sebastian & Torrens, Gustavo, 2016. "Collective action: Experimental evidence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 36-55.
    19. Alós-Ferrer, Carlos & Garagnani, Michele, 2020. "The cognitive foundations of cooperation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 71-85.
    20. Schiff, Maurice, 1999. "Trade, migration, and welfare : the impact of social capital," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2044, The World Bank.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:beh:jbepv1:v:7:y:2023:i:2:p:21-32. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SABE (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sabeeea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.