IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tin/wpaper/20220023.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Weighting the Waiting: Intertemporal Social Preferences

Author

Listed:
  • Kirsten I.M. Rohde

    (Erasmus University Rotterdam and Maastricht University)

  • Job van Exel

    (Erasmus University Rotterdam)

  • Merel A.J. van Hulsen

    (Erasmus University Rotterdam)

Abstract

This paper studies intertemporal social preferences. We introduce intertemporal dictator and ultimatum games where players decide on the timing of monetary payoffs. The setting is two- dimensional: inequalities can arise in the time as well as in the monetary dimension. The results of our experiment show that decisions on the distribution of the timing of payoffs depend on inequalities in the sizes of these payoffs in a systematic way in intertemporal ultimatum games, but much less so in intertemporal dictator games. Surprisingly, we found positive correlation between decisions only in some intertemporal games and regular games, and no correlation with time preferences. All in all our results cannot be explained by an intertemporal social preference model that assumes utility to be a simple weighted sum of discounted utilities of players. Our results rather suggest that the weight given to the discounted utility of a player depends on the inequality in discounted utilities. Hence, this paper calls for the development of new models of intertemporal social preferences.

Suggested Citation

  • Kirsten I.M. Rohde & Job van Exel & Merel A.J. van Hulsen, 2021. "Weighting the Waiting: Intertemporal Social Preferences," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 22-023/I, Tinbergen Institute, revised 01 Mar 2024.
    • Handle: RePEc:tin:wpaper:20220023
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://papers.tinbergen.nl/22023.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Falk, Armin & Fischbacher, Urs, 2006. "A theory of reciprocity," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 293-315, February.
    2. Ben Greiner, 2015. "Subject pool recruitment procedures: organizing experiments with ORSEE," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 1(1), pages 114-125, July.
    3. Rodriguez-Lara, Ismael & Ponti, Giovanni, 2017. "Social Motives vs Social Influence: an Experiment on Time Preferences," MPRA Paper 76486, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Rong, Rong & Gnagey, Matthew & Grijalva, Therese, 2018. "“The less you Discount, the more it shows you really care”: Interpersonal discounting in households," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 1-23.
    5. Breman, Anna, 2011. "Give more tomorrow: Two field experiments on altruism and intertemporal choice," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(11), pages 1349-1357.
    6. J. Michelle Brock & Andreas Lange & Erkut Y. Ozbay, 2013. "Dictating the Risk: Experimental Evidence on Giving in Risky Environments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(1), pages 415-437, February.
    7. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Emmanuel Kemel, 2014. "Eliciting Prospect Theory When Consequences Are Measured in Time Units: “Time Is Not Money”," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(7), pages 1844-1859, July.
    8. Kovarik, Jaromir, 2009. "Giving it now or later: Altruism and discounting," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 102(3), pages 152-154, March.
    9. 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.
    10. Dirk Engelmann & Martin Strobel, 2004. "Inequality Aversion, Efficiency, and Maximin Preferences in Simple Distribution Experiments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(4), pages 857-869, September.
    11. Charles Noussair & Jan Stoop, 2015. "Time as a medium of reward in three social preference experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(3), pages 442-456, September.
    12. Simone Schaner, 2015. "Do Opposites Detract? Intrahousehold Preference Heterogeneity and Inefficient Strategic Savings," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 7(2), pages 135-174, April.
    13. Yang, Xiaojun & Carlsson, Fredrik, 2016. "Influence and choice shifts in households: An experimental investigation," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 54-66.
    14. Aline Bütikofer & Kjell G Salvanes, 2020. "Disease Control and Inequality Reduction: Evidence from a Tuberculosis Testing and Vaccination Campaign," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 87(5), pages 2087-2125.
    15. Andreoni, James & Serra-Garcia, Marta, 2021. "Time inconsistent charitable giving," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    16. Carlsson, Fredrik & He, Haoran & Martinsson, Peter & Qin, Ping & Sutter, Matthias, 2012. "Household decision making in rural China: Using experiments to estimate the influences of spouses," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 525-536.
    17. Rong Rong & Therese C. Grijalva & Jayson Lusk & W. Douglass Shaw, 2019. "Interpersonal discounting," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 58(1), pages 17-42, February.
    18. Shane Frederick & George Loewenstein & Ted O'Donoghue, 2002. "Time Discounting and Time Preference: A Critical Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 40(2), pages 351-401, June.
    19. Roger Berger & Heiko Rauhut & Sandra Prade & Dirk Helbing, "undated". "Bargaining over time in ultimatum game experiments," Working Papers CCSS-10-002, ETH Zurich, Chair of Systems Design.
    20. Rodriguez-Lara, Ismael & Ponti, Giovanni, 2017. "Social motives vs social influence: An experiment on interdependent time preferences," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 177-194.
    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. M A J van Hulsen & K I M Rohde & N J A van Exel, 2022. "Consideration of others and consideration of future consequences predict cooperation in an acute social dilemma: an application to COVID-19," Oxford Open Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 1, pages 1-11.

    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. Felix Koelle & Lukas Wenner, 2018. "Present-Biased Generosity: Time Inconsistency across Individual and Social Contexts," Discussion Papers 2018-02, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    2. Felix Koelle & Thomas Lauer, 2018. "Cooperation, Discounting, and the Effects of Delayed Costs and Benefits," Discussion Papers 2018-10, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    3. Kölle, Felix & Wenner, Lukas, 2019. "Time-Inconsistent Generosity: Present Bias across Individual and Social Contexts," VfS Annual Conference 2019 (Leipzig): 30 Years after the Fall of the Berlin Wall - Democracy and Market Economy 203505, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    4. Felix Kölle & Thomas Lauer, 2020. "Understanding Cooperation in an Intertemporal Context," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 046, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    5. Islam, Marco, 2022. "Intertemporal Prosocial Choice: The Inconsistency Puzzle," Working Papers 2022:12, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    6. Glätzle-Rützler, Daniela & Lergetporer, Philipp & Sutter, Matthias, 2021. "Collective intertemporal decisions and heterogeneity in groups," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 131-147.
    7. Doll, Monika & Seebauer, Michael & Tonn, Maren, 2017. "Bargaining over waiting time in gain and loss framed ultimatum games," FAU Discussion Papers in Economics 15/2017, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Institute for Economics.
    8. Bigoni, Maria & Dragone, Davide & Luchini, Stéphane & Prati, Alberto, 2021. "Estimating Time Preferences for Leisure," IZA Discussion Papers 14590, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Erkut, Hande, 2022. "Social norms and preferences for generosity are domain dependent," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 121-140.
    10. Müller, Stephan & Rau, Holger A., 2017. "Decisions under uncertainty in social contexts," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 290, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics, revised 2017.
    11. Despoina Alempaki & Andrew M. Colman & Felix Kölle & Graham Loomes & Briony D. Pulford, 2022. "Investigating the failure to best respond in experimental games," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(2), pages 656-679, April.
    12. Peeters, Ronald & Vorsatz, Marc, 2021. "Simple guilt and cooperation," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    13. Gago, Andrés, 2021. "Reciprocity and uncertainty: When do people forgive?," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    14. Christian Kellner & David Reinstein & Gerhard Riener, 2017. "Conditional generosity and uncertain income: Evidence from five experiments," Discussion Papers 1707, University of Exeter, Department of Economics.
    15. Reindl, Ilona & Tyran, Jean-Robert, 2021. "Equal opportunities for all? How income redistribution promotes support for economic inclusion," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 390-407.
    16. de Oliveira, Angela C.M. & Jacobson, Sarah, 2021. "(Im)patience by proxy: Making intertemporal decisions for others," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 83-99.
    17. Dold, Malte & Khadjavi, Menusch, 2017. "Jumping the queue: An experiment on procedural preferences," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 127-137.
    18. Fadong Chen & Urs Fischbacher, 2015. "Cognitive Processes of Distributional Preferences: A Response Time Study," TWI Research Paper Series 101, Thurgauer Wirtschaftsinstitut, Universität Konstanz.
    19. Carlos Alós-Ferrer & Jaume García-Segarra & Alexander Ritschel, 2018. "The Big Robber Game," ECON - Working Papers 291, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    20. Rau, Holger & Müller, Stephan, 2017. "Decisions under Uncertainty in Social Contexts," VfS Annual Conference 2017 (Vienna): Alternative Structures for Money and Banking 168228, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Intertemporal social preferences; social preferences; time preferences; dictator game; ultimatum game; multidimensional inequality;
    All these keywords.

    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:tin:wpaper:20220023. 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: Tinbergen Office +31 (0)10-4088900 (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/tinbenl.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.