Publications
"Social Preferences and the Variability of Conditional Cooperation" (with Simon Gächter, Kyeongtae Lee & Martin Sefton). Economic Theory. 2024.
We experimentally examine how incentives affect conditional cooperation (i.e., cooperating in response to cooperation and defecting in response to defection) in social dilemmas. In our first study, subjects play eight Sequential Prisoner’s Dilemma games with varying payoffs. We elicit second mover strategies and find that most second movers conditionally cooperate in some games and free ride in others. The rate of conditional cooperation is higher when the own gain from defecting is lower and when the loss imposed on the first mover by defecting is higher. This pattern is consistent with both social preference models and stochastic choice models. In a second study subjects play 64 social dilemma games, and we jointly estimate noise and social preference parameters at the individual level. Most of our subjects place significantly positive weight on others’ payoffs, supporting the underlying role of social preferences in conditional cooperation. Our results suggest that conditional cooperation is not a fixed trait but rather a symptom of the interaction between game incentives and underlying social preferences.
The study of relationship closeness has a long history in psychology and is currently expanding across the social sciences, including economics. Estimating relationship closeness requires appropriate tools. Here, we introduce and test a tool for estimating relationship closeness: 'IOS11'. The IOS11 scale has an 11-point response scale, is a refinement of the widely used Inclusion-of-Other-in-the-Self scale. Our tool has three key features. First, the IOS11 scale is easy to understand and administer. Second, we provide a portable, interactive interface for the IOS11 scale, which can be used in lab and online studies. Third, and crucially, based on within-participant correlations of 751 individuals, we demonstrate strong validity of the IOS11 scale in terms of representing features of relationships captured by a range of more complex survey instruments. Based on these correlations we find that the IOS11 scale outperforms the IOS scale and performs as well as the related Oneness scale.
"Interaction of reasoning ability and distributional preferences in a social dilemma" (with Alexander Vostroknutov). Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization. 2017.
In a within subjects design we evaluate distributional preferences and reasoning ability to explain choices in the Traveler's Dilemma. We recruit subjects from economics and non-economics majors to have a high variance of preferences and abilities. We find that economists follow the efficiency criterion while non-economists follow maximin. Economists also show a better reasoning ability. We, therefore, confirm the self-selection hypothesis of choosing a major. An equilibrium of an incomplete information version of the Traveler's Dilemma explains the behavior we observe. Subjects with low reasoning ability make choices away from equilibrium. Thus, (non)cooperative behavior might be misinterpreted if subjects’ reasoning ability is not taken into account.
Working Papers
"To hide or not to hide? How fear and futility affect the decision to report a mistake" (with Sarah Bowen, Anna Hochleitner & Richard Mills)
Reject & Resubmit in Experimental Economics
"Measuring Creativity: Associative Thinking in Semantic Networks" (with Urs Fischbacher, Chris Starmer & Fabio Tufano)
Identifying creative ability and its determinants is crucial in understanding artistic and innovative achievements. Previous work has shown that performance across established creativity tasks does not correlate within participants. A potential reason for this finding is that most creativity tasks lack well-defined performance criteria. In this paper, we develop a novel tool for measuring creative ability and assess its performance through experimental tests. We construct a semantic network serving as the underlying structure of our tool. Based on this network, participants perform two associative thinking tasks, Local Search and Depth Search. We characterise each task by relating it to an established measure of creativity, finding that performance in our proposed tasks is significantly related to their matched creativity task across several dimensions. Our new tool improves on established creativity tasks by utilising a predefined solution space. While capturing key features of established methodologies, it substantially increases on the ease of implementation and interpretation. In addition we also provide causal evidence on the effect of incentives on our tool.
"The Unintended Effects of Ethical Decision Aids in Organizations" (with Maxim Egorov, Baiba Renerte, Carmen Tanner, Alexander Wagner & Nicole Witt)
Unethical behavior, deception, and fraud are major concerns in corporate governance. This paper examines the effectiveness of contemplation questions (CQs) as decision aids for employees facing ethical dilemmas. CQs, such as “Will the reputation of our company be damaged if my decision is made public?” are intended to activate moral agency and prompt employees to consider their actions from various perspectives (e.g., self, peers, company). Through two pre-registered, incentivized vignette experiments, we systematically investigate the causal effect of CQs on ethical decision-making. In Study 1 (N = 1,986), merely presenting CQs had no impact on ethical decisions. In Study 2 (N = 1,322), increasing engagement with CQs led to marginally more ethical decisions among individuals with high moral identity but significantly fewer ethical decisions among those with low moral identity. These findings align with a conceptual framework of motivated moral reasoning and suggest that while CQs can positively affect some individuals, they also backfire, promoting unethical behavior precisely in those already predisposed to such tendencies.
"Organizational Ethics in Action: The Use of Contemplation Questions as Decision Aids in Large Companies" (with Baiba Renerte, Carmen Tanner, Alexander Wagner & Nicole Witt)
Organizations are investing increasing effort and resources into supporting ethical decisionmaking among employees. One common approach involves the use of "contemplation questions" (CQs) - simple, reflective prompts designed to encourage thoughtful consideration of ethical challenges. In this study, we compile a unique dataset on CQ usage among the world's largest companies and find that at least 35% of Fortune Global 200 companies and 59% of S&P 200 companies employ CQs. An analysis of 727 CQs reveals significant variation across regions and industries. Based on an employee survey, we propose a classification of CQs according to the normative references they invoke, resulting in five categories: Law and Reputation, Company Policies and Culture, Universal Principles, Self, and Peers. We find that companies favor CQs focused on legal and organizational norms, whereas employees rate questions appealing to universal principles and personal values as more useful - indicating a potential mismatch between corporate practices and employee preferences and motivating future research on behavioral effectiveness.
Work in Progress
A Flexible Method for Distributional Preference Elicitation (with Simon Gächter, Chris Starmer & Fabio Tufano)
Working paper in preparation [Draft available upon request]Altruism in Networks: A Field Experiment on Social Closeness, Preferences and Transfers (with Simon Gächter, Chris Starmer & Fabio Tufano)
Working paper in preparationEthical conflicts in the workplace: Insights from employees and experts (with Nicole Witt, Carmen Tanner, Maxim Egorov, Baiba Renerte & Alexander Wagner)
[Draft available upon request]