A hybrid public good experiment eliciting multi-dimensional choice data

Similar to Fischbacher and Gachter (2010) we suggest an elicitation method for exploring the motivation of participants when contributing to a public good in the role of “leader” or “follower”. In the Hybrid Public Good experiment each of two interacting contributors chooses an independent contribution level as well as three adjusted contribution levels when (s)he, as the only adjusting player, learns that the other’s independent contribution is smaller, equal or larger than the own one. To approximate the border cases of simultaneous contributing as well as sequential contributions we systematically vary the probability that one player can adjust, based on such qualitative information, but maintain that no adaptation at all and adaptation by only one occurs with positive probability. Adaptation is framed in two ways, once by additively changing the own independent contribution and once by stating new contribution levels. Surprisingly, the framing effect becomes stronger with experience. Reacting to coinciding independent contributions implies impressive conformity in contributing. Reacting to higher, respectively lower independent contributions implies average upward, and, more strongly, downward adaptation.     

Inequality and public good provision: An experimental analysis

Recent studies report that economic inequality is associated with reduced government expenditures on social programs. Several prominent social scientists, including Putman (Putnam, R., 2000. Bowling Alone. Simon and Schuster, New York), attribute this to the detrimental “psychosocial effects” of group heterogeneity on cooperation. We test the hypothesis that inequality within a group reduces individual contributions in a public goods experiment. Unlike previous examinations of inequality and public good provision, we introduce inequality by manipulating the levels and distributions of fixed payments given to subjects. When made salient through public information about each individual's standing within the group, inequality reduces contributions to the public good for all group members.     

Where are you from? Cultural differences in public good experiments

We study the effect of cultural differences on contributions in a public good experiment, analysing real-time interactions between Italian and British subjects in their home countries. In the first treatment, subjects play in nationally homogeneous groups. In the second treatment, Italian and British subjects play in heterogeneous groups, knowing the nationality of the group members. In the third treatment, we control for a possible “country effect” by giving players no information on nationality. The data suggest that, in homogeneous groups, British subjects contribute significantly more to the public good; contributions are lower in heterogeneous groups; there is no country effect.     

Inducing efficient conditional cooperation patterns in public goods games, an experimental investigation

This study analyses the behavior in a repeated public goods game when subjects know about the possibility of existence of strict conditional cooperators. We employed a baseline treatment and a threat treatment in which subjects are informed about the possibility of being in a group together with automata playing a grim trigger strategy. We conjecture the resulting game allows for almost fully efficient outcomes. Contributions in the threat treatment increase by 40% before a surprise restart, and by 50% after the surprise restart. In line with the grim trigger strategy subjects contribute either all or nothing in the threat treatment.     

Producing public goods in networks: Some effects of social comparison and endogenous network change

As actors participate in the production of public goods, processes of social comparison may affect the decisions about the individual contributions as well as the endogenously changing structure of an underlying social network. This leads to the transformation of an ordinary n-player Prisoner's Dilemma of collective action into an n-player coordination game. The paper uses agent-based simulations to trace the formation of public goods while varying network characteristics, such as density, segregation, or the strength of relationships. Additionally, the usage of both a forward- and a backward-looking agent model shows possible implications of different assumptions about the actors’ decision making.     

Common fate motivates cooperation: The influence of risks on contributions to public goods

In order to study whether common fate induced by shared risk can promote cooperation, I introduce two types of risks into a public goods game: risk that is common among all group members (the COM treatment), and risk that is independent across individuals (the IND treatment). In both treatments, zero contributions is the only equilibrium. In contrast to the equilibrium analysis, contributions to the public goods in the experiment approach zero under the independent risk but remain at high levels when the common risk is present. Analysis of the data reveals that different reactions to beliefs are fundamental to this treatment effect. While beliefs and contributions in the first periods, as well as the belief formation processes, are similar across treatments, subjects in the IND treatment are significantly less cooperative than those in the COM treatment with the same beliefs. A large variation in group contributions is observed in the COM treatment. Further analysis shows that initial beliefs can explain most of the variation in the long-run contribution level, implying the importance of beliefs in shaping the players’ experience and establishing group norms.     

The role of beliefs,trust, and risk in contributions to a public good

This paper experimentally investigates if and how beliefs, trust, and risk attitudes are associated with cooperative behavior. By applying incentivized elicitation methods to measure these concepts, we find that beliefs about others’ cooperation and trust are positively correlated with cooperation in a public goods game. However, even though contributing to a public good resembles a situation of making decisions under strategic uncertainty, elicited risk preferences do not seem to explain cooperation in a systematic way.     

Do what (you think) the rich will do: Inequality and belief heterogeneity in public good provision

Beliefs about others’ cooperativeness are among the strongest determinants of cooperative behaviours. Beliefs about different others, however, are not necessarily uniform, nor necessarily related to past behaviours: Different expectations about different others might solely originate from differences in observed individual characteristics. Finally, not all such beliefs need drive conditional behaviour alike.In a public good game with heterogeneous endowments, I find that rich subjects are expected to cooperate more by both rich and poor individuals, and that behaviours of both the rich and poor correlate only with beliefs about the rich. An intervention aimed at increasing perceived group cohesion has no impact on beliefs and mixed impacts on cooperation. I conclude with implications for information dissemination about uncooperative behaviour in the mass media and avenues for further research.     

As others see us: Differing perceptions of public relations in Nigeria among practitioners and the general public

This study investigates the extent to which there exists a relationship between the perception of professionals and members of the general public regarding image of public relations (PR) profession in Nigeria. Four operational hypotheses were tested using Chi-square cross tabulation. The result shows that members of the general public and professionals perceived PR messages as credible. However, members of the general public, unlike professionals, perceived the loyalty of PR professionals to be more on the side of employers and clients; the role of PR was perceived as basically oriented towards media relations; and PR profession was perceived more as a tool for repairing damaged organisational image. Appropriate recommendations are offered.