IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ecinqu/v43y2005i3p614-622.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Beliefs About Other-Regarding Preferences in a Sequential Public Goods Game

Author

Listed:
  • Jennifer C. Coats
  • William S. Neilson

Abstract

Experimental evidence is used to deduce players' beliefs about their opponents' concern for others. The experiment is a sequential public good provision game with a provision point and two different refund rules. A theory is constructed to show how early contributions should change with the refund rule depending on the first mover's beliefs about subsequent players' other-regarding preferences. The evidence rejects the hypothesis that early players believe that their opponents are inequality averse and also rejects the hypothesis that early players are concerned with security. The evidence is consistent with beliefs in spite, reciprocity, or a concern for security. (JEL H41, C90, D63, D64) Copyright 2005, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Jennifer C. Coats & William S. Neilson, 2005. "Beliefs About Other-Regarding Preferences in a Sequential Public Goods Game," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 43(3), pages 614-622, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ecinqu:v:43:y:2005:i:3:p:614-622
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/ei/cbi042
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Maas, Victor S. & Yin, Huaxiang, 2022. "Finding partners in crime? How transparency about managers’ behavior affects employee collusion," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    2. Buchmann, Tobias & Haering, Alexander & Kudic, Muhamed & Rothgang, Michael, 2018. "Does sequential decision-making trigger collective investment in automobile R&D? Experimental evidence," Ruhr Economic Papers 785, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    3. Shakun D. Mago & Jennifer Pate, 2023. "Greed and fear: Competitive and charitable priming in a threshold volunteer's dilemma," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 61(1), pages 138-161, January.
    4. David McEvoy, 2010. "Not it: opting out of voluntary coalitions that provide a public good," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 142(1), pages 9-23, January.
    5. Martin Sefton & Robert Shupp & James M. Walker, 2007. "The Effect Of Rewards And Sanctions In Provision Of Public Goods," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 45(4), pages 671-690, October.
    6. Steiger, Eva-Maria & Zultan, Ro'i, 2014. "See no evil: Information chains and reciprocity," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 1-12.
    7. McEvoy, David & Jones, Michael & McKee, Michael & Talberth, John, 2014. "Incentivizing cooperative agreements for sustainable forest management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 34-41.
    8. Yasuhiko Nakamura, 2015. "Biased Managers as Strategic Commitment in a Mixed Duopoly with Relative Profit-Maximizers," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 323-336, December.
    9. Roi Zultan & Eva-Maria Steiger, 2011. "See No Evil: Information Chains and Reciprocity in Teams," Working Papers 1108, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Department of Economics.
    10. Yasuhiko Nakamura, 2018. "Competition and Privatisation Policies in a Differentiated Mixed Oligopoly: The Pay†off†interdependence Approach," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(2), pages 193-216, June.
    11. Bernd Hayo & Björn Vollan, 2009. "Individual Heterogeneity, Group Interaction, and Co-operative Behaviour: Evidence from a Common-Pool Resource Experiment in South Africa and Namibia," MAGKS Papers on Economics 200917, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    12. Nakamura, Yasuhiko, 2015. "Price versus quantity in a mixed duopoly: The case of relative profit maximization," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 37-43.
    13. Lisa Bruttel & Werner Güth, 2018. "Asymmetric voluntary cooperation: a repeated sequential best-shot experiment," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 47(3), pages 873-891, September.
    14. Hayo, Bernd & Vollan, Björn, 2012. "Group interaction, heterogeneity, rules, and co-operative behaviour: Evidence from a common-pool resource experiment in South Africa and Namibia," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 9-28.
    15. Quan, Ji & Liu, Wei & Chu, Yuqing & Wang, Xianjia, 2018. "Stochastic dynamics and stable equilibrium of evolutionary optional public goods game in finite populations," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 502(C), pages 123-134.
    16. Matsumura, Toshihiro & Matsushima, Noriaki & Cato, Susumu, 2013. "Competitiveness and R&D competition revisited," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 541-547.
    17. Sam Whitt & Rick K. Wilson, 2007. "Public Goods in the Field: Katrina Evacuees in Houston," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 74(2), pages 377-387, October.
    18. Nakamura, Yasuhiko, 2014. "Biased managers as strategic commitment: The relative profit approach," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 230-238.
    19. Toshihiro Matsumura & Noriaki Matsushima & Susumu Cato, 2009. "Relative Performance and R&D Competition," ISER Discussion Paper 0752, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    20. Nakamura, Yasuhiko, 2011. "Bargaining over managerial delegation contracts and merger incentives in an international oligopoly," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 47-61, March.
    21. Coats, Jennifer C. & Gronberg, Timothy J. & Grosskopf, Brit, 2009. "Simultaneous versus sequential public good provision and the role of refunds -- An experimental study," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(1-2), pages 326-335, February.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • H41 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Public Goods
    • C90 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - General
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • D64 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Altruism; Philanthropy; Intergenerational Transfers

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:oup:ecinqu:v:43:y:2005:i:3:p:614-622. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/weaaaea.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.