Elicited Beliefs and Social Information in Modified Dictator Games: What Do Dictators Believe Other Dictators Do?

44 Pages Posted: 8 Apr 2009

See all articles by Nagore Iriberri

Nagore Iriberri

University of the Basque Country - Department of Foundations of Economic Analysis I

Date Written: January 15, 2009

Abstract

We use subjects' actions in modified dictator games to perform a within-subject classification of individuals into four different types of interdependent preferences: Selfish, Social Welfare maximizers, Inequity Averse and Competitive. We elicit beliefs about other subjects' actions in the same modified dictator games to test how much of the existent heterogeneity in others' actions is known by subjects. We find that subjects with different interdependent preferences in fact have different beliefs about others' actions. In particular, Selfish individuals cannot conceive others being non-Selfish while Social Welfare maximizers are closest to the actual distribution of others' actions. We finally provide subjects with information on other subjects' actions and re-classify individuals according to their (new) actions in the same modified dictator games. We find that social information does not affect Selfish individuals, but that individuals with interdependent preferences are more likely to change their behavior and tend to behave more selfishly.

Keywords: Interdependent preferences, social welfare maximizing, inequity aversion, belief elicitation, social information, experiments, mixture-of-types models, LeeX

JEL Classification: C72, C9, D81

Suggested Citation

Iriberri, Nagore, Elicited Beliefs and Social Information in Modified Dictator Games: What Do Dictators Believe Other Dictators Do? (January 15, 2009). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1374287 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1374287

Nagore Iriberri (Contact Author)

University of the Basque Country - Department of Foundations of Economic Analysis I ( email )

Avenida Lehendakari Aguirre 83
E-48015 Bilbao
Spain

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
76
Abstract Views
844
Rank
572,249
PlumX Metrics