Norms of Reciprocation Exhibited by Polish Students in the Trust Game: Experimental Results
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18778/0208-6018.323.01Keywords:
social capital, generalised trust, reciprocation, norms, experimental game theory, the Trust Game, PolandAbstract
Norms of reciprocity and the level of generalised trust are components of the social capital of a society, which is argued to be associated with economic growth. This article presents results from a large scale study of Polish students based on the Trust Game, in which an initiator and respondent can obtain mutual benefits when the initiator exhibits trust in the respondent, who then expresses positive reciprocity. Based on these results, we investigate norms of positive reciprocation within the Polish student community. Analysis indicates that a large proportion of students seem to use one of four simple norms of reciprocation. In statistical terms, the level of reciprocation is rather well reflected in the expectations of the initiators.
Downloads
References
Akaike H. (1974), A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 19(6), p. 716–723.
Google Scholar
Algan Y., Cahuc P. (2010), Inherited trust and growth, American Economic Review 100(5), p. 2060–2092.
Google Scholar
Ashraf N., Bohnet I., Piankov N. (2006), Decomposing trust and trustworthiness, Experimental Economics 9(3), p. 193–208.
Google Scholar
Bahry D.L., Whitt S., Wilson R.K. (2003), The wasted generation: intergenerational trust in Russia, Allied Social Science Meetings, Washington, DC.
Google Scholar
Baran N.M., Sapienza P., Zingales, L. (2010), Can we infer social preferences from the lab? Evidence from the trust game, No. w15654, National Bureau of Economic Research.
Google Scholar
Berg J., Dickhaut J., McCabe K. (1995), Trust, reciprocity and social history, Games and Economic Behavior 10(1), p. 122–142.
Google Scholar
Borghans L., Heckman J.J., Golsteyn B. H., Meijers H. (2009), Gender differences in risk aversion and ambiguity aversion, “Journal of the European Economic Association” 7(2–3), p. 649–658.
Google Scholar
Croson R., Buchan N. (1999), Gender and culture: International experimental evidence from trust games, “American Economic Review” 89(2), p. 386–391.
Google Scholar
Czapiński J. (2008), Kapitał ludzki i kapitał społeczny a dobrobyt materialny, Polski parodoks, „Zarządzanie Publiczne” 2(4), p. 5–28.
Google Scholar
Dempster A.P., Laird N.M., Rubin D.B. (1977), Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM algorithm, “Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (methodological)” 39, p. 1–38.
Google Scholar
Dunning D., Fetchenhauer D., Schlösser T.M. (2012), Trust as a social and emotional act: Noneconomic considerations in trust behaviour, “Journal of Economic Psychology” 33(3), p. 686–694.
Google Scholar
Działek J. (2009), Social Capital and Economic Growth in Polish Regions, Munich Personal RePEc Archive, Paper No. 18287, http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/18287/1/MPRA_paper_18287.pdf (accessed 25.05.2015).
Google Scholar
Fehr E., Schmidt K. (2006), The economics of fairness, reciprocity and altruism – experimental evidence and new theories, In: S.C. Kolm, J.M. Ythier (eds.), Handbook of the economics of giving, altruism and reciprocity, vol. 1, Elsevier Publishing, Amsterdam, p. 615–691.
Google Scholar
Garbarino E., Slonim R. (2009), The robustness of trust and reciprocity across a heterogeneous US population, “Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization” 69(3), p. 226–240.
Google Scholar
Glaeser E., Laibson D., Scheinkman J., Soutter C. (2000), Measuring trust, “Quarterly Journal of Economics” 115(3), p. 811–846.
Google Scholar
Growiec K. (2011), Kapitał społeczne: geneza i społeczne konsekwencje, SWPS Academic Publishing, Warsaw.
Google Scholar
Güth W., Schmittberger R., Schwarze B. (1982), An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 3(4), p. 367–388.
Google Scholar
Isaac M., Walker J. (1988), Group size effects in public goods provision: The voluntary contribution mechanism, Quarterly Journal of Economics 103, 179–199.
Google Scholar
Johnson N. D., Mislin A.A. (2011), Trust games: A meta-analysis, Journal of Economic Psychology 32(5), p. 865–889.
Google Scholar
Markowska-Przybyła U., Ramsey D. M. (2014), A game theoretical study of generalised trust and reciprocation in Poland: I. Theory and experimental design, Operations Research and Decisions 24(3), p. 59–76.
Google Scholar
Markowska-Przybyła U., Ramsey D. M. (2015), A game theoretical study of generalised trust and reciprocation in Poland: II. A description of the study group, “Operations Research and Decisions” 25(2), p. 51–73.
Google Scholar
Migheli M. (2012), Assessing trust through social capital? A possible experimental answer, “American Journal of Economics and Sociology” 71(2), p. 298–327.
Google Scholar
Platje J. (2011), Institutional capital: creating capacity and capabilities for sustainable development, University of Opole Publishing, Opole.
Google Scholar
Poznańska J., Poznański K. (2015), Comparison of patterns of convergence among “emerging markets” of Central Europe, Eastern Europe and Central Asia, “Comparative Economic Research” 18(1), p. 5–23.
Google Scholar
Putnam R.D., Leonardi R., Nanetti R.Y. (1994), Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA.
Google Scholar
Schwarz G. (1978), Estimating the dimension of a model. “Annals of Statistics” 6(2), p. 461–464.
Google Scholar
Vyrastekova J., Onderstal S. (2005), The trust game behind the veil of ignorance: A note on gender differences, “CentER Discussion Paper”; vol. 2005–96, Tilburg: Microeconomics.
Google Scholar
Zak P.J., Knack S. (2001), Trust and Growth, “The Economic Journal” 111(470), p. 295–321.
Google Scholar
Zak P.J., Kurzban R., Matzner W.T. (2005), Oxytocin is associated with human trustworthiness, “Hormones and Behaviour” 48(5), p. 522–527.
Google Scholar
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
