2007
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2007.04.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Giving little by little: Dynamic voluntary contribution games

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
51
2

Year Published

2008
2008
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
3

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 74 publications
(57 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
4
51
2
Order By: Relevance
“…A round-by-round Wilcoxon signed-rank test shows that while there is no difference between initial and final tentative quantities, implemented quantities are significantly lower than initially prepared ones. 17 The median and modal choices in the stochastic revision market also imply that several participants in fact behaved similar to the trigger strategy equilibrium path identified in the theoretical model of Kamada and Kandori (2015). Players start with quantities that are lower than the static Nash equilibrium of 16 and they remain there till a cut-off time.…”
Section: Dynamics Of Quantity Adjustmentmentioning
confidence: 58%
“…A round-by-round Wilcoxon signed-rank test shows that while there is no difference between initial and final tentative quantities, implemented quantities are significantly lower than initially prepared ones. 17 The median and modal choices in the stochastic revision market also imply that several participants in fact behaved similar to the trigger strategy equilibrium path identified in the theoretical model of Kamada and Kandori (2015). Players start with quantities that are lower than the static Nash equilibrium of 16 and they remain there till a cut-off time.…”
Section: Dynamics Of Quantity Adjustmentmentioning
confidence: 58%
“…A joint chi-square nonparametric test indicates that the difference in the provision rates is not statistically significant (p-value = 0.530). 5 By contrast, when the value of the good is low (A = 1.5), the provision rate decreases sharply to 0.10 when T = 1, while remaining at 0.47 when T = 2 and 0.678 when T = 5. These provision rates are significantly different at all conventional significance levels (p-value = 0.000).…”
Section: The Time Effect (T )mentioning
confidence: 96%
“…There has been a growing literature in experimental economics looking at different ways in which leadership can affect outcome in public goods games through information signalling (Potters et al 2007), leader's ability to exclude followers (Guth et al 2007) or leader's social status (Kumru and Vesterlund 2010). Even in the simplest case of leadership without any asymmetric information or additional powers, there is evidence of positive influence of leadership on overall contribution (Moxnes and Heijden 2003;Duffy et al 2007;Jack and Recalde 2015). The 'leader' contributes more to set a good example and trigger reciprocity from other players.…”
Section: Experimental Designmentioning
confidence: 99%