IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/feb/framed/00190.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

What explains hadza food sharing?

Author

Listed:
  • Frank Marlowe

Abstract

Most hypotheses proposed to explain human food sharing address motives, yet most tests of these hypotheses have measured only the patterns of food transfer. To choose between these hypotheses we need to measure people's propensity to share. To do that, I played two games (the Ultimatum and Dictator Games) with Hadza hunter-gatherers. Despite their ubiquitous food sharing, the Hadza are less willing to share in these games than people in complex societies are. They were also less willing to share in smaller camps than larger camps. I evaluate the various food-sharing hypotheses in light of these results.

Suggested Citation

  • Frank Marlowe, 2004. "What explains hadza food sharing?," Framed Field Experiments 00190, The Field Experiments Website.
    • Handle: RePEc:feb:framed:00190
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://s3.amazonaws.com/fieldexperiments-papers2/papers/00190.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Frank Marlowe, 2004. "Dictators and ultimatums in an egalitarian society of hunter-gatherers, the hadza of tanzania," Framed Field Experiments 00189, The Field Experiments Website.
    2. Joseph Henrich, 2000. "Does Culture Matter in Economic Behavior? Ultimatum Game Bargaining among the Machiguenga of the Peruvian Amazon," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(4), pages 973-979, September.
    3. Joseph Henrich, 2000. "Does culture matter in economic behavior? Ultimatum game bargaining among the machiguenga," Artefactual Field Experiments 00067, The Field Experiments Website.
    4. Colin F. Camerer & Richard H. Thaler, 1995. "Anomalies: Ultimatums, Dictators and Manners," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 209-219, Spring.
    5. Ernst Fehr & Simon Gächter, 2002. "Altruistic punishment in humans," Nature, Nature, vol. 415(6868), pages 137-140, January.
    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. Marcelo Sthel & José Glauco Tostes & Juliana Tavares, 2013. "Sustainable Complex Triangular Cells for the Evaluation of CO 2 Emissions by Individuals instead of Nations in a Scenario for 2030," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(5), pages 1-16, May.
    2. Daniel Wood, 2015. "Informal property rights as stable conventions in hawk-dove games with many players," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 25(4), pages 849-873, September.
    3. Denis Tverskoi & Andrea Guido & Giulia Andrighetto & Angel Sánchez & Sergey Gavrilets, 2023. "Disentangling material, social, and cognitive determinants of human behavior and beliefs," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-13, December.
    4. Jaakko Aspara & Kristina Wittkowski & Vicki G Morwitz & J Jeffrey Inman & Olivier Toubia, 2019. "Sharing-Dominant Logic? Quantifying the Association between Consumer Intelligence and Choice of Social Access Modes," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 46(2), pages 201-222.
    5. Jessica L Barker & Pat Barclay & H Kern Reeve, 2013. "Competition over Personal Resources Favors Contribution to Shared Resources in Human Groups," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(3), pages 1-9, March.

    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. Gurven, Michael & Zanolini, Arianna & Schniter, Eric, 2008. "Culture sometimes matters: Intra-cultural variation in pro-social behavior among Tsimane Amerindians," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 67(3-4), pages 587-607, September.
    2. Urszula Markowska-Przybyła & David Ramsey, 2014. "A game theoretical study of generalized trust and reciprocation in Poland. I. Theory and experimental design," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 24(3), pages 59-76.
    3. Stefan Kohler & European University Institute, 2006. "Inequality Aversion and Stochastic Decision-making: Experimental Evidence from Zimbabwean Villages after Land Reform," Economics Series Working Papers GPRG-WPS-061, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    4. Heller, William B. & Sieberg, Katri K., 2010. "Honor among thieves: Cooperation as a strategic response to functional unpleasantness," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 351-362, September.
    5. Jang, Chaning & Lynham, John, 2015. "Where do social preferences come from?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 25-28.
    6. Daniel Karell & Sebastian Schutte, 2018. "Aid, exclusion, and the local dynamics of insurgency in Afghanistan," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 55(6), pages 711-725, November.
    7. Irlenbusch, Bernd, 2004. "Relying on a man's word?: An experimental study on non-binding contracts," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 299-332, September.
    8. Fengwei Sun & Xiaoxiao Wang & Quanlan Yi & Mengliang Wu, 2015. "Does Culture Matter to Pro-Social Behavior? Evidence from a Cross-Ethnic Lab Experiment," Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies, AMH International, vol. 7(6), pages 94-110.
    9. Burnham, Terence C., 2013. "Toward a neo-Darwinian synthesis of neoclassical and behavioral economics," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 90(S), pages 113-127.
    10. Luis José Blas Moreno Garrido, 2015. "Relative Injustice Aversion," Working Papers. Serie AD 2015-08, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
    11. Laurence Fiddick & Denise Cummins, 2001. "Reciprocity in Ranked Relationships: Does Social Structure Influence Social Reasoning?," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 149-170, May.
    12. Gagen, Michael, 2013. "Isomorphic Strategy Spaces in Game Theory," MPRA Paper 46176, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Moreno-Garrido, Luis José Blas, 2013. "Relative Injustice Aversion," QM&ET Working Papers 13-4, University of Alicante, D. Quantitative Methods and Economic Theory, revised 27 Jul 2015.
    14. Holler, Manfred J. & Leroch, Martin, 2010. "Efficiency and justice revisited," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 311-319, September.
    15. Jeffrey P. Carpenter, 2003. "Bargaining Outcomes as the Result of Coordinated Expectations," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 47(2), pages 119-139, April.
    16. Engelhardt, Sebastian v. & Freytag, Andreas, 2013. "Institutions, culture, and open source," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 90-110.
    17. Liqi Zhu & Gerd Gigerenzer & Gang Huangfu, 2013. "Psychological Traces of China's Socio-Economic Reforms in the Ultimatum and Dictator Games," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(8), pages 1-6, August.
    18. Ben-Ner, Avner & Putterman, Louis & Kong, Fanmin & Magan, Dan, 2004. "Reciprocity in a two-part dictator game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 333-352, March.
    19. Werner, Katharina & Graf Lambsdorff, Johann, 2016. "Emotional numbing and lessons learned after a violent conflict - Experimental evidence from Ambon, Indonesia," Passauer Diskussionspapiere, Volkswirtschaftliche Reihe V-74-16, University of Passau, Faculty of Business and Economics.
    20. Wang, Mei & Rieger, Marc Oliver & Hens, Thorsten, 2016. "How time preferences differ: Evidence from 53 countries," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 115-135.

    More about this item

    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:feb:framed:00190. 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: Francesca Pagnotta (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.fieldexperiments.com .

    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.