IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-04922031.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Survey on experiments about trust and collaborative vs conflictual language

Author

Listed:
  • Caterina Cruciani

    (University of Ca’ Foscari [Venice, Italy])

  • Carlo Romano Marcello Alessandro Santagiustina

    (médialab - médialab (Sciences Po) - Sciences Po - Sciences Po, University of Ca’ Foscari [Venice, Italy])

  • Costanza Sartoris

    (University of Ca’ Foscari [Venice, Italy])

  • Massimo Warglien

    (University of Ca’ Foscari [Venice, Italy])

Abstract

The survey focuses on different experimental paradigms and the implications of previous experimental work for understanding the causal antecedents of trust and conflictual language in social media, bridging different literatures and traditions of empirical research on trust. It provides a structured framework to analyze trust and understand the role of language for the emergence of collaborative or conflictual language within social media.

Suggested Citation

  • Caterina Cruciani & Carlo Romano Marcello Alessandro Santagiustina & Costanza Sartoris & Massimo Warglien, 2024. "Survey on experiments about trust and collaborative vs conflictual language," Post-Print hal-04922031, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04922031
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-04922031v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-04922031v1/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gefen, David, 2000. "E-commerce: the role of familiarity and trust," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 725-737, December.
    2. Burdea, Valeria & Woon, Jonathan, 2022. "Online belief elicitation methods," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    3. Gigerenzer, Gerd & Todd, Peter M. & ABC Research Group,, 2000. "Simple Heuristics That Make Us Smart," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195143812.
    4. Ingmar Geiger, 2020. "From Letter to Twitter: A Systematic Review of Communication Media in Negotiation," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 29(2), pages 207-250, April.
    5. Schniter, E. & Shields, T.W. & Sznycer, D., 2020. "Trust in humans and robots: Economically similar but emotionally different," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    6. Ostrom, Elinor & Walker, James & Gardner, Roy, 1992. "Covenants with and without a Sword: Self-Governance Is Possible," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 86(2), pages 404-417, June.
    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. John Duffy, 2011. "Trust in Second Life," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 78(1), pages 53-62, July.
    9. Nava Ashraf & Iris Bohnet & Nikita Piankov, 2006. "Decomposing trust and trustworthiness," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 9(3), pages 193-208, September.
    10. Elliott, Catherine S. & Hayward, Donald M. & Canon, Sebastian, 1998. "Institutional framing: Some experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 455-464, May.
    11. Fehrler, Sebastian & Kosfeld, Michael, 2013. "Can you trust the good guys? Trust within and between groups with different missions," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 121(3), pages 400-404.
    12. John Duffy, 2011. "Symposium: Trust in Second Life," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 78(1), pages 53-62, 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. Zakaria Babutsidze & Nobuyuki Hanaki & Adam Zylbersztejn, 2019. "Digital Communication and Swift Trust," Post-Print halshs-02409314, HAL.
    2. Dickinson, David L. & Masclet, David & Peterle, Emmanuel, 2018. "Discrimination as favoritism: The private benefits and social costs of in-group favoritism in an experimental labor market," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 220-236.
    3. Zakaria Babutsidze & Nobuyuki Hanaki & Adam Zylbersztejn, 2021. "Nonverbal content and trust: An experiment on digital communication," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(4), pages 1517-1532, October.
    4. Sofianos, Andis, 2022. "Self-reported & revealed trust: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    5. James C. Cox & Elinor Ostrom & James M. Walker, 2011. "Bosses and Kings: Asymmetric Power in Paired Common Pool and Public Good Games," Experimental Economics Center Working Paper Series 2011-06, Experimental Economics Center, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University, revised Aug 2012.
    6. Luo, Jun & Wang, Xinxin, 2020. "Hukou identity and trust—Evidence from a framed field experiment in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    7. Kok, Lucille & Oosterbaan, Veerle & Stoker, Hester & Vyrastekova, Jana, 2020. "In-group favouritism and social norms: Public goods experiments in Tanzania," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    8. Polipciuc, Maria, 2022. "Group identity and betrayal: decomposing trust," Research Memorandum 005, Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).
    9. Meier, Stephan & Pierce, Lamar & Vaccaro, Antonino & La Cara, Barbara, 2016. "Trust and in-group favoritism in a culture of crime," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 132(PA), pages 78-92.
    10. Bejarano, Hernán & Gillet, Joris & Rodriguez-Lara, Ismael, 2021. "Trust and trustworthiness after negative random shocks," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    11. Pablo Hernandez & Dylan Minor, 2015. "Political Identity and Trust," Harvard Business School Working Papers 16-012, Harvard Business School.
    12. Zakaria Babutsidze & Nobuyuki Hanaki & Adam Zylbersztejn, 2020. "Nonverbal content and swift trust: An experiment on digital communication," Working Papers 2008, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon St-Étienne (GATE Lyon St-Étienne), Université de Lyon.
    13. Innocenti, Alessandro, 2017. "Virtual reality experiments in economics," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 71-77.
    14. Cetre, Sophie & Algan, Yann & Grimalda, Gianluca & Murtin, Fabrice & Pipke, David & Putterman, Louis & Schmidt, Ulrich & Siegerink, Vincent, 2024. "Ethnic bias, economic achievement and trust between large ethnic groups: A study in Germany and the U.S," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 224(C), pages 996-1021.
    15. Murnighan, J. Keith & Wang, Long, 2016. "The social world as an experimental game," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 80-94.
    16. Póvoa, Angela Cristiane Santos & Pech, Wesley & Woiciekovski, Edinéia, 2020. "Trust and social preferences: A cross-cultural experiment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    17. Fehrler, Sebastian & Przepiorka, Wojtek, 2016. "Choosing a partner for social exchange: Charitable giving as a signal of trustworthiness," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 157-171.
    18. Iris Bohnet & Yael Baytelman, 2007. "Institutions and Trust," Rationality and Society, , vol. 19(1), pages 99-135, February.
    19. Maria Bigoni & Stefania Bortolotti & Veronica Rattini, 2022. "A tale of two cities: an experiment on inequality and preferences," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 92(1), pages 189-222, February.
    20. Meier, Stephan & Pierce, Lamar & Vaccaro, Antonino, 2014. "Trust and In-Group Favoritism in a Culture of Crime," IZA Discussion Papers 8169, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    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:hal:journl:hal-04922031. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.