People playing games: The human face of experimental economics

Southern Economic Journal

Volumn 73, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 841-857

  Eckel, Catherine C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT DALLAS   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34248545392     PISSN: 00384038     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (37)

1. Andreoni, James, and Ragan Petrie. 2006. Beauty, gender and stereotypes: Evidence from laboratory experiments. Working Paper, University of California, San Diego.
2. Andreoni, James, and Lise Vesterlund. 2001. Which is the fair sex? Gender differences in altruism. Quarterly Journal of Economics 116:293-312.
3. Ashraf, Nava, Iris Bohnet, and Nikita Piankov. 2006. Decomposing trust and trustworthiness. Experimental Economics 9(3):193-208.
4. Berg, Joyce E., John W. Dickhaut, and Kevin McCabe. 1995. Trust, reciprocity, and social history. Games and Economic Behavior 10(1):122-42.
5. Bertrand, Marianne, and Sendhil Mullainathan. 2004. Are Emily and Greg more employable than Lakisha and Jamal? A field experiment on labor market discrimination. American Economic Review 94(4):991-1013.
6. Biddle, Jeff, and Daniel Hamermesh. 1998. Beauty, productivity and discrimination: Lawyers' looks and lucre. Journal of Labor Economics 16:172-201.
7. Burks, Stephen, Jeff Carpenter, and Eric Verhoogen. 2007. Fairness and freight-handlers: A test of fair-wage theory in a trucking firm, with Stephen Burks and Eric Verhoogen. Industrial and Labor Relations Review. In press.
8. Burns, Justine. 2005. Race and trust in post-apartheid South Africa. Working paper. Center for Social Science Research, University of Cape Town.
9. Couch, Kenneth, and Mary C. Daly. 2002. Black-white wage inequality in the 1990s: A decade of progress. Economic Inquiry 40(1):31-41.
10. Eckel, Catherine C., and Philip J. Grossman. 1996a. Altruism in anonymous dictator games. Games and Economic Behavior 16:181-191.
11. Eckel, Catherine C., and Philip Grossman. 1996b. The relative price of fairness: Gender differences in a punishment game. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 30(2):143-158.
12. Eckel, Catherine C., and Philip J. Grossman. 1998. Are women less selfish than men? Evidence from dictator games. The Economic Journal 108(448):726-35.
13. Eckel, Catherine C., and Philip J. Grossman. 2003. Rebates versus matching: Does how we subsidize charitable contributions matter? Journal of Public Economics 87(3-4):681-701.
14. Eckel, Catherine C., Philip J. Grossman, and M. Johnston. 2005. An experimental test of the rowding out hypothesis. Journal of Public Economics 89(8): 1543-60.
15. Eckel, Catherine C., Cathleen A. Johnson, and Duncan Thomas. 2006. Altruism and resource sharing within families and villages in Mexico. Presented at the Economic Science Association Regional Meetings, Tucson, AZ, October.
16. Eckel, Catherine C., and Ragan Petrie. 2006. Face value. Unpublished paper, Georgia State University.
17. Eckel, Catherine C., and Rick K. Wilson. 2005. Detecting trustworthiness: Does beauty confound intuition?Unpublished paper, University of Texas at Dallas.
18. Eckel, Catherine C., and Rick K. Wilson. 2006. Internet cautions. Experimental Economics 9(1):53-66.
19. Eckel, Catherine C., and Rick K. Wilson. 2007. Initiating trust: The conditional effects of sex and race among strangers. Unpublished paper, Rice University.
20. Fershtman, Chaim, and Uri A. Gneezy. 2001. Discrimination in a segmented society: An experimental approach. Quarterly Journal of Economics 116(1):351-77.
21. Forsythe, R., J. L. Horowitz, N. E. Savin, and M. Sefton. 1994. Fairness in simple bargaining experiments. Games and Economic Behavior 6:347-69.
22. Glaeser, Edward L., David Laibson, Jose A. Scheinkman, and Christine Soutter. 2000. Measuring trust. Quarterly Journal of Economics 115(3):811-46.
23. Hamermesh, Daniel, and Jeff Biddle. 1994. Beauty and the labor market. American Economic Review 84:1174-94.
24. Harris, Misty. 2006. Here's a problem we'd all like to have. Leader Post, 25 September, C1-2.
25. Hoffman, Elizabeth, Kevin McCabe, Keith Shachat, and Vernon L. Smith. 1994. Preference, property rights and anonymity in bargaining games. Games and Economic Behavior 7(3):346-80.
26. Holt, Charles A. 2003. Economic science: An experimental approach for teaching and research. Southern Economic Journal 69(4):155-11.
27. Langlois, Judith H., Lisa Klakanis, Adam J. Rubenstein, Andrea Larson, Monica Hallam, and Monica Smoot. 2000.
28. Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analysis and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin 126(3):390-423.
29. Mulford, Matthew, John Orbell, Catherine Shatto, and Jean Stockard. 1998. Physical attractiveness, opportunity, and success in everyday exchange. American Journal of Sociology 103(6): 1565-92.
30. Ottati, Victor C., and Megan Deiger. 2002. Visual cues and the candidate evaluation process. In The social psychology of politics, edited by V. C. Ottati et al. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, pp. 75-87.
31. Rhodes, Gillian, Fiona Proffitt, Jonathon M. Grady, and Alex Sumich. 1998. Facial symmetry and the perception of beauty. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 5(4):659-69.
32. Solnick, Sara J., and Maurice E. Schweitzer. 1999. The influence of physical attractiveness and gender on ultimatum game decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 79(3):199-215.
33. Stewart, J. E. 1984. Appearance and punishment: The attraction-leniency effect in the courtroom. Journal of Social Psychology 125:373-8.
34. Webster, Jr. M., and J. E. Driskell, Jr. 1983. Beauty as status. American Journal of Sociology 89:140-65.
35. Whitt, Sam, and Rick K. Wilson. 2007. The dictator game, fairness and ethnicity in postwar Bosnia. American Journal of Political Science 51(3). In press.
36. Wilson, Rick K., and Catherine C. Eckel. 2006. Judging a book by its cover: Beauty and expectations in a trust game. Political Research Quarterly 59(2): 189-202.
37. Zebrowitz, Leslie A., and Gillian Rhodes. 2004. Sensitivity to bad genes and the anomalous face overgeneralization effect: Cue validity, cue utilization, and accuracy in judging intelligence and health. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 28(3): 167-85.