IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/trn/csnjrn/v6i2p2-19.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Workers’ Propensity to Make a Monetary Sacrifice in Favour of Colleagues or People from the General Population: A Comparison based on an Artefactual Field Experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Giacomo Degli Antoni

    (University of Parma, Department of Law, Politics and International Studies (Parma, Italy); EconomEtica, Inter-University Center for Economic Ethics and Corporate Social Responsibility (Milano, Italy).)

Abstract

By drawing on a dataset collected through an artefactual field experiment, this paper analyses the propensity of social cooperative workers to make a monetary sacrifice in favour of colleagues or people drawn randomly from the general population. We find that workers tend to sacrifice lower amounts when it benefits colleagues rather than people from the general population. By analysing first- and second-order beliefs, we show that the former partly account for the difference in workers’ choices; however, our analysis reveals that other motives count. A possible explanation, which is rooted in the distinction between moralistic and knowledge-based trust is provided.

Suggested Citation

  • Giacomo Degli Antoni, 2017. "Workers’ Propensity to Make a Monetary Sacrifice in Favour of Colleagues or People from the General Population: A Comparison based on an Artefactual Field Experiment," Journal of Entrepreneurial and Organizational Diversity, European Research Institute on Cooperative and Social Enterprises, vol. 6(2), pages 2-19.
    • Handle: RePEc:trn:csnjrn:v:6:i:2:p:2-19
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://jeodonline.com/jeod_articles/workers-propensity-to-make-a-monetary-sacrifice-in-favour-of-colleagues-or-people-from-the-general-population-a-comparison-based-on-an-artefactual-field-experiment/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Oriana Bandiera & Iwan Barankay & Imran Rasul, 2005. "Social Preferences and the Response to Incentives: Evidence from Personnel Data," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 120(3), pages 917-962.
    2. Camerer, Colin F & Hogarth, Robin M, 1999. "The Effects of Financial Incentives in Experiments: A Review and Capital-Labor-Production Framework," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 19(1-3), pages 7-42, December.
    3. Gary Charness & Marie-Claire Villeval, 2009. "Cooperation and Competition in Intergenerational Experiments in the Field and the Laboratory," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(3), pages 956-978, June.
    4. Ernst Fehr & Urs Fischbacher & Bernhard von Rosenbladt & J�rgen Schupp & Gert G. Wagner, "undated". "A Nation-Wide Laboratory: Examining trust and trustworthiness by integrating behavioral experiments into representative surveys," IEW - Working Papers 141, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    5. Giacomo Degli Antoni & Fabio Sabatini, 2017. "Social cooperatives, social welfare associations and social networks," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 75(2), pages 212-230, April.
    6. Dow,Gregory K., 2003. "Governing the Firm," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521818537, October.
    7. Falk, Armin & Zehnder, Christian, 2013. "A city-wide experiment on trust discrimination," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 15-27.
    8. Degli Antoni, Giacomo & Grimalda, Gianluca, 2016. "Groups and trust: Experimental evidence on the Olson and Putnam hypotheses," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 38-54.
    9. Charness, Gary B & VILLEVAL, MARIE-CLAIRE, 2008. "Cooperation and Competition in Intergenerational Experiments in," University of California at Santa Barbara, Economics Working Paper Series qt210035w2, Department of Economics, UC Santa Barbara.
    10. Berg Joyce & Dickhaut John & McCabe Kevin, 1995. "Trust, Reciprocity, and Social History," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 122-142, July.
    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. Charness, Gary & Kuhn, Peter, 2011. "Lab Labor: What Can Labor Economists Learn from the Lab?," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 3, pages 229-330, Elsevier.
    2. Raymond Montizaan & Andries de Grip & Frank Cörvers & Thomas Dohmen, 2016. "The Impact of Negatively Reciprocal Inclinations on Worker Behavior: Evidence from a Retrenchment of Pension Rights," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(3), pages 668-681, March.
    3. Gereke, Johanna & Schaub, Max & Baldassarri, Delia, 2018. "Ethnic diversity, poverty and social trust in Germany: Evidence from a behavioral measure of trust," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 13(7), pages 1-15.
    4. Matteo M. Galizzi & Daniel Navarro-Martinez, 2019. "On the External Validity of Social Preference Games: A Systematic Lab-Field Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(3), pages 976-1002, March.
    5. Fijnanda van Klingeren, 2020. "Playing nice in the sandbox: On the role of heterogeneity, trust and cooperation in common-pool resources," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-36, August.
    6. Martin G. Kocher, 2015. "How Trust in Social Dilemmas Evolves with Age," CESifo Working Paper Series 5447, CESifo.
    7. Alves, Guillermo & Blanchard, Pablo & Burdin, Gabriel & Chávez, Mariana & Dean, Andrés, 2022. "Like principal, like agent? Managerial preferences in employee-owned firms," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(6), pages 877-899, December.
    8. Sutter, Matthias & Kocher, Martin G., 2007. "Trust and trustworthiness across different age groups," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 59(2), pages 364-382, May.
    9. Johanna Gereke & Max Schaub & Delia Baldassarri, 2018. "Ethnic diversity, poverty and social trust in Germany: Evidence from a behavioral measure of trust," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(7), pages 1-15, July.
    10. Thomas Dohmen & Armin Falk & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde, 2012. "The Intergenerational Transmission of Risk and Trust Attitudes," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 79(2), pages 645-677.
    11. Banerjee, Ritwik, 2018. "On the interpretation of World Values Survey trust question - Global expectations vs. local beliefs," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 491-510.
    12. Isabel Thielmann & Daniel W. Heck & Benjamin E. Hilbig, 2016. "Anonymity and incentives: An investigation of techniques to reduce socially desirable responding in the Trust Game," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 11(5), pages 527-536, September.
    13. Kocher, Martin G. & Martinsson, Peter & Matzat, Dominik & Wollbrant, Conny, 2015. "The role of beliefs, trust, and risk in contributions to a public good," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 236-244.
    14. Armin Falk & Anke Becker & Thomas Dohmen & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde, 2023. "The Preference Survey Module: A Validated Instrument for Measuring Risk, Time, and Social Preferences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(4), pages 1935-1950, April.
    15. Giacomo Degli Antoni & Gianluca Grimalda, 2024. "Is social capital bridging or bonding? Evidence from a field experiment with association members," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 97(1), pages 167-190, August.
    16. Matthias Sutter & Martin Kocher, 2004. "Age And The Development Of Trust And Reciprocity," Royal Economic Society Annual Conference 2004 105, Royal Economic Society.
    17. Holm, Håkan & Nystedt, Paul, 2005. "Trust in surveys and games - a matter of money and location?," Working Papers 2005:26, Lund University, Department of Economics, revised 15 Aug 2005.
    18. Gill, Andrej & Heinz, Matthias & Schumacher, Heiner, 2014. "Trust, trustworthiness and selection into the financial industry," CFS Working Paper Series 458, Center for Financial Studies (CFS).
    19. Dohmen, Thomas & Falk, Armin & Huffman, David B. & Sunde, Uwe, 2006. "Homo Reciprocans: Survey Evidence on Prevalence, Behavior and Success," IZA Discussion Papers 2205, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    20. Brülhart, Marius & Usunier, Jean-Claude, 2004. "Verified Trust: Reciprocity, Altruism and Noise in Trust Games," CEPR Discussion Papers 4758, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Social dilemma; Social cooperatives; Trust; Artefactual field experiment;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • A13 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Relation of Economics to Social Values
    • L31 - Industrial Organization - - Nonprofit Organizations and Public Enterprise - - - Nonprofit Institutions; NGOs; Social Entrepreneurship
    • P13 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Capitalist Economies - - - Cooperative Enterprises
    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments

    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:trn:csnjrn:v:6:i:2:p:2-19. 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: Barbara Franchini (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/euricit.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.