IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/esi/discus/2004-17.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Evolution of Spontaneous Social Exchange - An Experimental Study -

Author

Listed:
  • S. K. Berninghaus
  • Werner Gueth
  • Katinka Pantz
  • Bodo Vogt

Abstract

Each of several exchange partners is the monopoly owner of a specific commodity which she can share with others. It is optimal to keep the own endowment, but all would gain by mutual gift exchange. Participants play the game repeatedly in constant groups (partner design) and can establish stable exchange relations over time. Will they include all group members, as suggested by efficiency, will early exploiters be permanently isolated (ostracism) and will groups become more efficient over time? To answer these questions the game is repeated once with a new group. We also vary the group size.

Suggested Citation

  • S. K. Berninghaus & Werner Gueth & Katinka Pantz & Bodo Vogt, 2004. "Evolution of Spontaneous Social Exchange - An Experimental Study -," Papers on Strategic Interaction 2004-17, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group.
    • Handle: RePEc:esi:discus:2004-17
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: ftp://papers.econ.mpg.de/esi/discussionpapers/2004-17.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bagwell, Kyle, 1995. "Commitment and observability in games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 271-280.
    2. Jackson, Matthew O. & Wolinsky, Asher, 1996. "A Strategic Model of Social and Economic Networks," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 44-74, October.
    3. Esther Hauk & Rosemarie Nagel, 2001. "Choice of Partners in Multiple Two-Person Prisoner's Dilemma Games," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 45(6), pages 770-793, December.
    4. Esther Hauk, 2003. "Multiple Prisoner's Dilemma Games with(out) an Outside Option: an Experimental Study," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 54(3), pages 207-229, May.
    5. Venkatesh Bala & Sanjeev Goyal, 2000. "A Noncooperative Model of Network Formation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(5), pages 1181-1230, September.
    6. Urs Fischbacher, 2007. "z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(2), pages 171-178, June.
    7. Esther Hauk & Rosemarie Nagel, 2000. "Choice of partners in multiple two-person prisoner's dilemma games: An experimental study," Economics Working Papers 487, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    8. Weg, Eythan & Rapoport, Amnon & Felsenthal, Dan S., 1990. "Two-person bargaining behavior in fixed discounting factors games with infinite horizon," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 76-95, March.
    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. Werner Güth & Vittoria Levati & Georg von Wangenheim, 2004. "Relatives Versus Neighbors - An Experiment Studying Spontaneous Social Exchange -," Papers on Strategic Interaction 2004-33, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group.

    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. Corbae, Dean & Duffy, John, 2008. "Experiments with network formation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 81-120, September.
    2. Mariya Teteryatnikova & James Tremewan, 2015. "Stability in Network Formation Games with Streams of Payoffs: An Experimental Study," Vienna Economics Papers vie1508, University of Vienna, Department of Economics.
    3. Falk Armin & Kosfeld Michael, 2012. "It's all about Connections: Evidence on Network Formation," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 11(3), pages 1-36, September.
    4. Kirchsteiger, Georg & Mantovani, Marco & Mauleon, Ana & Vannetelbosch, Vincent, 2016. "Limited farsightedness in network formation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 97-120.
    5. Rong, Rong & Houser, Daniel, 2015. "Growing stars: A laboratory analysis of network formation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 380-394.
    6. Charness, Gary & Jackson, Matthew O., 2007. "Group play in games and the role of consent in network formation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 136(1), pages 417-445, September.
    7. Dong, Lu & Huang, Lingbo & Lien, Jaimie W. & Zheng, Jie, 2024. "How alliances form and conflict ensues," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 255-276.
    8. Michael Caldara & Michael McBride, 2014. "An Experimental Study of Network Formation with Limited Observation," Working Papers 141501, University of California-Irvine, Department of Economics.
    9. Marco Mantovani & Georg Kirchsteiger & Ana Mauleon & Vincent Vannetelbosch, 2011. "Myopic or Farsighted? An Experiment on Network Formation," Working Papers 2011.45, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    10. Miriam Al Lily, 2023. "Establishing human connections: experimental evidence from the helping game," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 52(3), pages 805-832, September.
    11. He, Simin & Zou, Xinlu, 2024. "Public goods provision in a network formation game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 218(C), pages 104-131.
    12. Alexia Gaudeul & Caterina Giannetti, 2015. "Privacy, Trust and Social Network Formation," Jena Economics Research Papers 2015-023, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    13. Takács, Károly, 2010. "Hálózati kísérletek [Network experiments]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(11), pages 958-979.
    14. Harmsen - van Hout, M.J.W. & Dellaert, B.G.C. & Herings, P.J.J., 2008. "Behavorial effects in individual decisions of network formation," Research Memorandum 019, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    15. Djawadi, Behnud Mir & Endres, Angelika & Hoyer, Britta & Recker, Sonja, 2019. "Network formation and disruption - An experiment are equilibrium networks too complex?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 708-734.
    16. Gallo, Edoardo & Riyanto, Yohanes E. & Roy, Nilanjan & Teh, Tat-How, 2019. "Cooperation in an Uncertain and Dynamic World," MPRA Paper 97878, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Giorgio Coricelli & Dietmar Fehr & Gerlinde Fellner, 2004. "Partner Selection in Public Goods Experiments," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 48(3), pages 356-378, June.
    18. Mariya Teteryatnikova & James Tremewan, 2015. "Stability in Network Formation Games with Streams of Payoffs: An Experimental Study," Vienna Economics Papers 1508, University of Vienna, Department of Economics.
    19. Mariya Teteryatnikova & James Tremewan, 2020. "Myopic and farsighted stability in network formation games: an experimental study," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 69(4), pages 987-1021, June.
    20. Neligh, Nathaniel, 2020. "Vying for dominance: An experiment in dynamic network formation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 719-739.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Evolution of exchange networks; bilateral reciprocity; mutual gift giving; ostracism; efficient trade;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • A13 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Relation of Economics to Social Values
    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • C92 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Group Behavior

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:esi:discus:2004-17. 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: Karin Richter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/mpiewde.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.