BazEkon - Biblioteka Główna Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Krakowie

BazEkon home page

Meny główne

Zawojska Ewa (University of Warsaw, Poland)
The role of dynamics for trust development. An experimental study
Ekonomia / Uniwersytet Warszawski, 2014, nr 38, s. 129-149, rys., tab., bibliogr. s. 148-149
Słowa kluczowe
Gry kooperacyjne, Teoria gier
Cooperative game, Game theory
We report results from a trust game applied in a dynamic setting, which enhances investment possibilities and offers higher potential payoff from cooperation. The proposed approach better reflects the predicaments people face in concluding informal contracts and enables to investigate dynamics of cooperation relationships between players. Although, transferred shares of the disposable endowment do not differ significantly across the standard and modified games, in the absolute values people send more in the dynamic context. Our results suggest that the dynamic setting of the relationship, which has been often ignored in previous studies, might be an important determinant of trust. (original abstract)
Dostępne w
Biblioteka Główna Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Krakowie
Biblioteka Szkoły Głównej Handlowej
Biblioteka Główna Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Poznaniu
Biblioteka Główna Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wrocławiu
Pełny tekst
  1. Anderhub, V. and Engelmann, D. and Güth, W., 2002, "An experimental study of the repeated trust game with incomplete information," Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, Vol. 48, No. 2, p. 197-216.
  2. Anderson, L.R. and Mellor, J.M. and Milyo, J., 2006, "Induced heterogeneity in trust experiments," Experimental Economics, Vol. 9, No. 3, p. 223-235.
  3. Berg, J. and Dickhaut, J. and McCabe, K., 1995, "Trust, reciprocity, and social history," Games and Economic Behavior Vol. 10, No. 1, p. 122-142.
  4. Bernheim, B.D. and Whinston, M.D., 1998, "Incomplete contracts and strategic ambiguity," American Economic Review Vol. 88, p. 902-932.
  5. Bohnet, I. and Huck, S., 2004, "Repetition and reputation: implications for trust and trustworthiness when institutions change," American Economic Review Vol. 94, p. 362-366.
  6. Bohnet, I. and Frey, B. and Huck, S., 2001, "More order with less law: On contract enforcement, trust, and crowding," American Political Science Review Vol. 95, No. 01, p. 131-144.
  7. Bornhorst, F. and Ichino, A. and Schlag, K. and Winter, E., 2004, How do people play a repeated trust game? Experimental evidence, Working Paper No. 04-43. Sonderforshungsbereich 504, University of Mannheim, Germany.
  8. Camerer, C., 2003, Behavioral game theory. Experiments in Strategic Interaction, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
  9. Charness, G. and Du, N. and Yang, C., 2011, "Trust and trustworthiness reputations in an investment game," Games and Economic Behavior Vol. 72, No. 2, p. 361-375.
  10. Coase, R., 1937, "The nature of the firm," Economica Vol. 4, p. 386-405.
  11. Reprinted in: Stigler, G., Boulding, K. (Eds.), 1952, Readings in Price Theory, Irwin, Homewood, p. 331-351.
  12. Dal Bó, P. and Fréchette, G., 2011, "The evolution of cooperation in infinitely repeated games: Experimental evidence," American Economic Review Vol. 101, No. 1, p. 411-429.
  13. Engle-Warnick, J. and Slonim, R.L., 2004, "The evolution of strategies in a repeated trust game," Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization Vol. 55, No. 4, p. 553-573.
  14. Engle-Warnick, J. and Slonim, R.L., 2006, "Learning to trust in indefinitely repeated games," Games and Economic Behavior Vol. 54, No. 1, p. 95-114.
  15. Fehr, E. and Schmidt, K.M., 1999, "A theory of fairness, competition and cooperation," Quarterly Journal of Economics Vol. 108, p. 437-459.
  16. Fershtman, C. and Gneezy, U., 2001, "Discrimination in a segmented society: an experimental approach," Quarterly Journal of Economics Vol. 116, p. 351-377.
  17. Glaeser, E. and Laibson, D. and Scheinkman, J. and Soutter, C., 2000, "Measuring trust," Quarterly Journal of Economics Vol. 115, p. 811-846.
  18. Greiner, B. and Ockenfels, A. and Werner, P., 2012, "The dynamic interplay of inequality and trust - an experimental study," Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization Vol. 81, No. 2, p. 355-365.
  19. Keser, C., 2002, Trust and reputation building in e-commerce, Working paper No. 2002s-75. CIRANO Scientific Series.
  20. Kreps, D.M. and Milgrom, P. and Roberts, J. and Wilson, R., 1982, "Rational cooperation in the finitely repeated prisoners' dilemma," Journal of Economic Theory Vol. 27, No. 2, p. 245-252.
  21. Kreps, D.M. and Wilson, R., 1982, "Reputation and imperfect information," Journal of Economic Theory Vol. 27, No. 2, p. 253-279.
  22. Levin, J., 2003, "Relational incentive contracts," American Economic Review Vo l, 93, p. 835-857.
  23. Piccione, M. and Rubinstein, A., 1993, "Finite automata play a repeated extensive game," Journal of Economic Theory Vol. 61, No. 1, p. 160-168.
  24. Selten, R. and Stoecker, R., 1986, "End behaviour in sequences of finite prisoner's dilemma supergames. A learning theory approach," Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization Vol. 7, No. 1, p. 47-40.
  25. Simon, H. A., 1981, The Sciences of the Artificial, MIT Press, Cambridge.
  26. Williamson, O., 1975, Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications , Free Press, New York
Cytowane przez
Udostępnij na Facebooku Udostępnij na Twitterze Udostępnij na Google+ Udostępnij na Pinterest Udostępnij na LinkedIn Wyślij znajomemu