IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cpr/ceprdp/19248.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A surprising hot-cold reciprocation gap

Author

Listed:
  • Ghidoni, Riccardo
  • Suetens, Sigrid
  • Yang, Jierui

Abstract

Experiments are conducted to investigate the effect of the decision mode on reciprocation in a one-shot trust game. Trustees either decided directly whether to reciprocate after observing their partner's choice or according to a contingent response plan made before observing their partner's choice. The main finding is that trustees were more likely to reciprocate under contingent decision making than under direct decision making. This reciprocation gap was not present when trust decisions were the outcome of a lottery, thus not made by trustors, which suggests that reciprocation choices must be the outcome of a commitment to reciprocate.

Suggested Citation

  • Ghidoni, Riccardo & Suetens, Sigrid & Yang, Jierui, 2024. "A surprising hot-cold reciprocation gap," CEPR Discussion Papers 19248, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    • Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:19248
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cepr.org/publications/DP19248
    Download Restriction: CEPR Discussion Papers are free to download for our researchers, subscribers and members. If you fall into one of these categories but have trouble downloading our papers, please contact us at subscribers@cepr.org
    ---><---

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

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C70 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - General
    • C90 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - General
    • D70 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - General

    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:cpr:ceprdp:19248. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cepr.org .

    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.