IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/djfw5.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Measuring Norms: A Comparison of the Predictive and Descriptive Power of Three Methods

Author

Listed:
  • Bogliacino, Francesco

    (Universidad Nacional de Colombia)

  • Aycinena, Diego

    (Universidad del Rosario)

  • Kimbrough, Erik

Abstract

We analyze and compare three methods of measuring norms: the Krupka and Weber (KW) coordination game, the two-step approach by Bicchieri and Xiao (BX), and a novel Binarized Scoring Method (BSM) we introduce that elicits the full distribution of normative beliefs. We test their effectiveness in two distinctive ways. First, we compare the fit and predictive power of the norms elicited by each method in 3 versions of the dictator game, which differ in how the pie is initially allocated. Then we use vignettes to assess the extent to which the methods can recover existing norms for various naturally occurring settings. We find that the KW method yields better predictive power within a norm-dependent utility model. All 3 methods effectively recover norms in field settings, although KW is more robust to false positives.

Suggested Citation

  • Bogliacino, Francesco & Aycinena, Diego & Kimbrough, Erik, 2023. "Measuring Norms: A Comparison of the Predictive and Descriptive Power of Three Methods," SocArXiv djfw5, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:djfw5
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/djfw5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/657c36584a0e9007798e90ce/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/djfw5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Erin L. Krupka & Roberto A. Weber, 2013. "Identifying Social Norms Using Coordination Games: Why Does Dictator Game Sharing Vary?," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 11(3), pages 495-524, June.
    2. Stephen V. Burks & Erin L. Krupka, 2012. "A Multimethod Approach to Identifying Norms and Normative Expectations Within a Corporate Hierarchy: Evidence from the Financial Services Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(1), pages 203-217, January.
    3. Jason Dana & Roberto Weber & Jason Kuang, 2007. "Exploiting moral wiggle room: experiments demonstrating an illusory preference for fairness," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 33(1), pages 67-80, October.
    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. Leopoldo Fergusson & José-Alberto Guerra & James A. Robinson, 2024. "Anti-social norms," NBER Working Papers 32717, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
      • Fergusson, Leopoldo & Guerra, José-Alberto & Robinson, James A., 2024. "Anti-social norms," Documentos CEDE 21159, Universidad de los Andes, Facultad de Economía, CEDE.

    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. Simon Gächter & Daniele Nosenzo & Martin Sefton, 2013. "Peer Effects In Pro-Social Behavior: Social Norms Or Social Preferences?," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 11(3), pages 548-573, June.
    2. Michael Kurschilgen, 2023. "Moral awareness polarizes people’s fairness judgments," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 61(2), pages 339-364, August.
    3. De Geest, Lawrence R. & Kingsley, David C., 2021. "Norm enforcement with incomplete information," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 403-430.
    4. Francesco Fallucchi & Daniele Nosenzo, 2022. "The coordinating power of social norms," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(1), pages 1-25, February.
    5. repec:cup:judgdm:v:10:y:2015:i:2:p:191-197 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. repec:cup:judgdm:v:17:y:2022:i:2:p:263-283 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Feess, Eberhard & Schilling, Thomas & Timofeyev, Yuriy, 2023. "Misreporting in teams with individual decision making: The impact of information and communication," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 209(C), pages 509-532.
    8. Abigail Barr & Marlene Dekker & Floyd Mwansa & Tia Linda Zuze, 2020. "Financial decision-making, gender and social norms in Zambia: Preliminary report on the quantitative data generation, analysis and results," Discussion Papers 2020-06, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    9. Casal, Sandro & Fallucchi, Francesco & Quercia, Simone, 2019. "The role of morals in three-player ultimatum games," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 67-79.
    10. Behnk, Sascha & Hao, Li & Reuben, Ernesto, 2022. "Shifting normative beliefs: On why groups behave more antisocially than individuals," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    11. Marta Serra-Garcia & Nora Szech, 2022. "The (In)Elasticity of Moral Ignorance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(7), pages 4815-4834, July.
    12. Desmet, Pieter T.M. & Engel, Christoph, 2021. "People are conditional rule followers," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    13. Werner, Peter, 2024. "On common evaluation standards and the acceptance of wage inequality," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 137-156.
    14. Guerra, Alice & Zhuravleva, Tatyana, 2021. "Do bystanders react to bribery?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 442-462.
    15. Gneezy, Uri & Saccardo, Silvia & Serra-Garcia, Marta & van Veldhuizen, Roel, 2020. "Bribing the Self," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 120, pages 311-324.
    16. Schmidt, Robert J., 2019. "Do injunctive or descriptive social norms elicited using coordination games better explain social preferences?," Working Papers 0668, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    17. Gächter, Simon & Gerhards, Leonie & Nosenzo, Daniele, 2017. "The importance of peers for compliance with norms of fair sharing," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 72-86.
    18. Kevin Bauer & Andrej Gill, 2024. "Mirror, Mirror on the Wall: Algorithmic Assessments, Transparency, and Self-Fulfilling Prophecies," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 35(1), pages 226-248, March.
    19. Fischer Sven & Goerg Sebastian J. & Hamann Hanjo, 2015. "Cui Bono, Benefit Corporation? An Experiment Inspired by Social Enterprise Legislation in Germany and the US," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 79-110, March.
    20. Christian Thoeni & Simon Gaechter, 2011. "Peer Effects and Social Preferences in Voluntary Cooperation," Discussion Papers 2011-09, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    21. Thomsson, Kaj M. & Vostroknutov, Alexander, 2017. "Small-world conservatives and rigid liberals: Attitudes towards sharing in self-proclaimed left and right," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 181-192.
    22. Bogliacino, Francesco & Aycinena, Diego & Kimbrough, Erik, 2024. "Eliciting normative expectations with coordination games allowing for neutral report," SocArXiv y3fha, Center for Open Science.

    More about this item

    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:osf:socarx:djfw5. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arabixiv.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.