2001
DOI: 10.1093/ei/39.2.280
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Simple and complex gift exchange in the laboratory

Abstract: We examine an experimental gift exchange game in which the players can improve upon the unique no-gifts equilibrium through cooperative gift giving. The main feature of the study is that there are two different types of gift exchange, which we call simple and complex exchange, respectively. Complex exchange gives higher payoffs than simple exchange but it requires not only mutual trust, like simple exchange, but also a substantial degree of coordination. We examine whether players are able to conclude simple a… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2002
2002
2010
2010

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…On the other hand, with leaders contributing 27% of the time and followers conditioning their contribution on that of the leaders, follower contributions are smaller in the sequential game. Van der Heijden et al (2001) find a similar effect in a gift exchange experiment. 24 Depending on how one splits the ties the two-sided p-value ranges from 0.4857 to 0.8857.…”
Section: Full Informationmentioning
confidence: 59%
“…On the other hand, with leaders contributing 27% of the time and followers conditioning their contribution on that of the leaders, follower contributions are smaller in the sequential game. Van der Heijden et al (2001) find a similar effect in a gift exchange experiment. 24 Depending on how one splits the ties the two-sided p-value ranges from 0.4857 to 0.8857.…”
Section: Full Informationmentioning
confidence: 59%
“…At the same time they believe support to be fairer than grants. 11 Van der Heijden, Nelissen, Potters and Verbon (2001) drew a similar conclusion based on a gift exchange experiment in which there were different cooperative outcomes. versa; see e.g.…”
Section: Concluding Discussionmentioning
confidence: 84%
“…Dewatripont, Jewitt and Tirole (1999a) and -2 -Recent literature in experimental economics (e.g. Fehr, Kirchsteiger and Riedl 1993;Berg, Dickhaut, and McCabe 1995, Fehr, Gächter and Kirchsteiger 1997, Charness 1998, Abbink, Irlenbusch, and Renner 2000, Dufwenberg and Gneezy 2000, Dufwenberg and Kirchsteiger 2000, Fehr and Schmidt 2000, Clark and Sefton 2001, Van der Heijden, Nelissen, Potters, and Verbon 2001, Irlenbusch and Sliwka 2003 has pointed out that the assumption that economic agents are guided by narrow self-interest and maximisation of monetary payoffs has to be rejected in many cases. Fairness and reciprocity play an important role in explaining human behaviour.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%