390 research outputs found
The Costs of Deception: Evidence From Psychology
Recently, it has been argued that the evidence in social science research suggests that deceiving subjects in an experiment does not lead to a significant loss of experimental control. Based on this assessment, experimental economists were counseled to lift their de facto prohibition against deception to capture its potential benefits. To the extent that this recommendation is derived from empirical studies, we argue that it draws on a selective sample of the available evidence. Building on a systematic review of relevant research in psychology, we present two major results: First, the evidence suggests that the experience of having been deceived generates suspicion which in turn is likely to affect judgment and decision making of a non-negligible number of participants. Second, we find little evidence for reputational spillover effects that have been hypothesized by a number of authors in psychology and economics (e.g., Kelman, 1967; Davis and Holt, 1993). Based on a discussion of the methodological costs and benefits of deception, we conclude that experimental economists' prohibition of deception is a sensible convention that economists should not abandon.experimental economics; deception; reputational spillover effects
The psychology and rationality of decisions from experience
Most investigations into how people make risky choices have employed a simple drosophila: monetary gambles involving stated outcomes and probabilities. People are asked to make decisions from description. When people decide whether to back up their computer hard drive, cross a busy street, or go out on a date, however, they do not enjoy the convenience of stated outcomes and probabilities. People make such decisions either in the void of ignorance or in the twilight of their own often limited experience of such real-world options. In the latter case, they make decisions from experience. Recent research has consistently documented that decisions from description and decisions from experience can lead to substantially different choices. Key in this description-experience gap is people's treatment of rare events. In this paper, I briefly review studies that have documented the description-experience gap, offer several explanations for this gap, and discuss to what extent people's decisions from experience are in conflict with benchmarks of rationalit
Reach and speed of judgment propagation in the laboratory
In recent years, a large body of research has demonstrated that judgments and
behaviors can propagate from person to person. Phenomena as diverse as
political mobilization, health practices, altruism, and emotional states
exhibit similar dynamics of social contagion. The precise mechanisms of
judgment propagation are not well understood, however, because it is difficult
to control for confounding factors such as homophily or dynamic network
structures. We introduce a novel experimental design that renders possible the
stringent study of judgment propagation. In this design, experimental chains of
individuals can revise their initial judgment in a visual perception task after
observing a predecessor's judgment. The positioning of a very good performer at
the top of a chain created a performance gap, which triggered waves of judgment
propagation down the chain. We evaluated the dynamics of judgment propagation
experimentally. Despite strong social influence within pairs of individuals,
the reach of judgment propagation across a chain rarely exceeded a social
distance of three to four degrees of separation. Furthermore, computer
simulations showed that the speed of judgment propagation decayed exponentially
with the social distance from the source. We show that information distortion
and the overweighting of other people's errors are two individual-level
mechanisms hindering judgment propagation at the scale of the chain. Our
results contribute to the understanding of social contagion processes, and our
experimental method offers numerous new opportunities to study judgment
propagation in the laboratory
How to model age-related motivational reorientations in risky choice: A Comment on Depping and Freund
Grandparental investment: Past, present, and future
What motivates grandparents to their altruism? We review answers from evolutionary theory, sociology, and economics. Sometimes in direct conflict with each other, these accounts of grandparental investment exist side-by-side, with little or no theoretical integration. They all account for some of the data, and none account for all of it. We call for a more comprehensive theoretical framework of grandparental investment that addresses its proximate and ultimate causes, and its variability due to lineage, values, norms, institutions (e.g., inheritance laws), and social welfare regimes. This framework needs to take into account that the demographic shift to low fecundity and mortality in economically developed countries has profoundly altered basic parameters of grandparental investment. We then turn to the possible impact of grandparental acts of altruism, and examine whether benefits of grandparental care in industrialized societies may manifest in terms of less tangible dimensions, such as the grandchildren's cognitive and verbal ability, mental health, and well-being. Although grandparents in industrialized societies continue to invest substantial amounts of time and money in their grandchildren, we find a paucity of studies investigating the influence that this investment has on grandchildren in low-risk family contexts. Under circumstances of duress - for example, teenage pregnancy or maternal depression - there is converging evidence that grandparents can provide support that helps to safeguard their children and grandchildren against adverse risks. We conclude by discussing the role that grandparents could play in what has been referred to as Europe's demographic suicid
Toward an integrative framework of grandparental investment
This response outlines more reasons why we need the integrative framework of grandparental investments and intergenerational transfers that we advocated in the target article. We discusses obstacles - from misconceptions to poor measures - that stand in the way of such a framework and of a better understanding of the effects of grandparenting in the developed world. We highlight new research directions that have emerged from the commentaries, and we end by discussing some of the things in our target article about which we may have been wron
Learning (Not) To Yield: An Experimental Study of Evolving Ultimatum Game Behavior
Whether behavior converges toward rational play or fair play in repeated ultimatum games depends on which player yields first. If responders concede first by accepting low offers, proposers would not need to learn to offer more, and play would converge toward unequal sharing. By the same token, if proposers learn fast that low offers are doomed to be rejected and adjust their offers accordingly, pressure would be lifted from responders to learn to accept such offers. Play would converge toward equal sharing. Here we tested the hypothesis that it is regret-both material and strategic-which determines how players modify their behavior. We conducted a repeated ultimatum game experiment with random strangers, in which one treatment does and another does not provide population feedback in addition to informing players about their own outcome. Our results show that regret is a good predictor of the dynamics of play. Specifically, we will turn to the dynamics that unfold when players make repeated decisions in the ultimatum game with randomly changing opponents, and when they learn not only about their own outcome in the previous round but also find out how the population on average has adapted to previous results (path dependence).Ultimatum bargaining game, Reputation, Regret, Learning, Experiment
- …