IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/apeclt/v24y2017i10p722-726.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Testing for heterogeneity of preferences in randomized experiments: a satisfaction-based approach applied to multiplayer prisoners’ dilemmas

Author

Listed:
  • Leonardo Becchetti
  • Vittorio Pelligra
  • Francesco Salustri

Abstract

We use experimental data from the ‘vote with the wallet’ multiplayer prisoner’s dilemma to investigate with a finite mixture approach the effect of a responsible purchase on players’ satisfaction. We find clear-cut evidence of heterogeneity of preferences with two groups of players that differ significantly in terms of effects of the responsible choice on satisfaction.

Suggested Citation

  • Leonardo Becchetti & Vittorio Pelligra & Francesco Salustri, 2017. "Testing for heterogeneity of preferences in randomized experiments: a satisfaction-based approach applied to multiplayer prisoners’ dilemmas," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(10), pages 722-726, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:apeclt:v:24:y:2017:i:10:p:722-726
    DOI: 10.1080/13504851.2016.1223813
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13504851.2016.1223813
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13504851.2016.1223813?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Becchetti, Leonardo & Salustri, Francesco, 2015. "The Vote With the Wallet as a Multiplayer Prisoner's Dilemma," AICCON Working Papers 141-2015, Associazione Italiana per la Cultura della Cooperazione e del Non Profit.
    2. Erlei, Mathias, 2008. "Heterogeneous social preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 65(3-4), pages 436-457, March.
    3. Rotemberg, Julio J., 2008. "Minimally acceptable altruism and the ultimatum game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 66(3-4), pages 457-476, June.
    4. Besley, Timothy & Ghatak, Maitreesh, 2007. "Retailing public goods: The economics of corporate social responsibility," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(9), pages 1645-1663, September.
    5. G. Daniel & M. Arce & Todd Sandler, 2005. "The Dilemma of the Prisoners’ Dilemmas," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(1), pages 3-24, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Engel, Christoph, 2020. "Estimating heterogeneous reactions to experimental treatments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 124-147.
    2. Solferino, Nazaria & Solferino, Viviana & Taurino, SerenaFiona, 2018. "Quantum entanglement and the emergence of collaboration in social media," MPRA Paper 86228, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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. Leonardo Becchetti & Vittorio Pelligra & Francesco Salustri, 2018. "The impact of redistribution mechanisms in the vote with the wallet game: experimental results," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 51(4), pages 595-619, December.
    2. Becchetti, Leonardo & Salustri, Francesco, 2016. "The political economy of the vote with the wallet," AICCON Working Papers 146-2016, Associazione Italiana per la Cultura della Cooperazione e del Non Profit.
    3. Leonardo Becchetti & Vittorio Pelligra & Fiammetta Rossetti, 2016. "The Corporate Legality Game. A Lab Experiment on The Impact of Policies, Frames and Information," CEIS Research Paper 390, Tor Vergata University, CEIS, revised 11 Jun 2016.
    4. Leonardo Becchetti & Francesco Salustri & Vittorio Pelligra & Alejandra Vásquez, 2018. "Gender differences in socially responsible consumption. An experimental investigation," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(33), pages 3630-3643, July.
    5. Adrian Bruhin & Ernst Fehr & Daniel Schunk, 2019. "The many Faces of Human Sociality: Uncovering the Distribution and Stability of Social Preferences," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 17(4), pages 1025-1069.
    6. Aseem Kaul & Jiao Luo, 2018. "An economic case for CSR: The comparative efficiency of for‐profit firms in meeting consumer demand for social goods," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(6), pages 1650-1677, June.
    7. Alberto Galasso & Mihkel Tombak, 2014. "Switching to Green: The Timing of Socially Responsible Innovation," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(3), pages 669-691, September.
    8. Hart, Oliver D. & Zingales, Luigi, 2017. "Companies Should Maximize Shareholder Welfare Not Market Value," Working Papers 267, The University of Chicago Booth School of Business, George J. Stigler Center for the Study of the Economy and the State.
    9. Becchetti, Leonardo & Palestini, Arsen & Solferino, Nazaria & Elisabetta Tessitore, M., 2014. "The socially responsible choice in a duopolistic market: A dynamic model of “ethical product” differentiation," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 114-123.
    10. Werner Hediger, 2013. "From Multifunctionality and Sustainability of Agriculture to the Social Responsibility of the Agri-food System," Journal of Socio-Economics in Agriculture (Until 2015: Yearbook of Socioeconomics in Agriculture), Swiss Society for Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, vol. 6(1), pages 59-80.
    11. Homroy, Swarnodeep, 2023. "GHG emissions and firm performance: The role of CEO gender socialization," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    12. Constantine Manasakis & Evangelos Mitrokostas & Emmanuel Petrakis, 2015. "Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility by Multinational Enterprises," Working Papers 1501, University of Crete, Department of Economics.
    13. Friedrichsen, Jana, 2013. "Image concerns and the provision of quality," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Market Behavior SP II 2013-211, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    14. Paul Pecorino, 2016. "A Portion of Profits to Charity: Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Profitability," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 83(2), pages 380-398, October.
    15. Paul Belleflamme & Valeria Forlin, 2020. "Endogenous vertical segmentation in a Cournot oligopoly," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 131(2), pages 181-195, October.
    16. Fabrice Etilé & Sabrina Teyssier, 2012. "Signaling Corporate Social Responsibility: Third-Party Certification vs. Brands," PSE Working Papers halshs-00736551, HAL.
    17. Declerck, Carolyn H. & Kiyonari, Toko & Boone, Christophe, 2009. "Why do responders reject unequal offers in the Ultimatum Game? An experimental study on the role of perceiving interdependence," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 335-343, June.
    18. Jayati Sarkar & Subrata Sarkar, 2015. "Corporate social responsibility in India - An Effort to bridge the welfare gap," Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai Working Papers 2015-023, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai, India.
    19. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/7fsnj6af7v9ncrf76qn5p5on9e is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Markus Kitzmueller, 2008. "Economics and Corporate Social Responsibility," Economics Working Papers ECO2008/37, European University Institute.
    21. Timothy Besley & Maitreesh Ghatak, 2017. "Profit with Purpose? A Theory of Social Enterprise," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 9(3), pages 19-58, August.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C92 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Group Behavior
    • D03 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Behavioral Microeconomics: Underlying Principles
    • D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis
    • D60 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - General
    • D71 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations

    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:taf:apeclt:v:24:y:2017:i:10:p:722-726. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RAEL20 .

    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.