A theory of kindness, reluctance, and shame for social preferences

Games and Economic Behavior

Volumn 66, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 394-403

  Neilson, William S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 64749086156     PISSN: 08998256     EISSN: 10902473     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.geb.2008.04.004     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Axelrod R. An evolutionary approach to norms. Amer. Polit. Sci. Rev. 80 (1986) 1095-1111
2. Barbera S., Bossert W., and Pattanaik P.K. Ranking sets of objects. In: Barbera S., Hammond P.J., and Seidl C. (Eds). Handbook of Utility Theory, vol. 2: Extensions (2004), Kluwer Academic, Boston
3. Bardsley, N., 2005. Dictator game giving: Altruism or artefact? A note. Working paper, University of Nottingham
4. Bereby-Meyer Y., and Grosskopf B. How manipulable are fairness perceptions? The effect of additional alternatives. Res. Econ. Inequality 11 (2004) 43-53
5. Bleichrodt H., and Schmidt U. A context-dependent model of the gambling effect. Manage. Sci. 48 (2002) 802-812
6. Bolton G.E., and Ockenfels A. ERC: A theory of equity, reciprocity, and competition. Amer. Econ. Rev. 100 (2000) 166-193
7. Camerer C. Behavioral Game Theory: Experiments in Strategic Interaction (2003), Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton
8. Conley, J.P., Neilson, W.S., 2007. Endogenous games and equilibrium adoption of social norms and ethical constraints. Working paper, Vanderbilt University
9. Dana J., Cain D.M., and Dawes R.M. What you don't know won't hurt me: Costly (but quiet) exit in dictator games. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Process. 100 (2006) 193-201
10. Fehr E., and Schmidt K. A theory of fairness, competition, and co-operation. Quart. J. Econ. 114 (1999) 817-868
11. Hamman, J., Loewenstein, G., Weber, R.A., 2007. Self-interest through agency: An alternative rationale for the principal-agent relationship. Working paper, Carnegie Mellon University
12. Huber J., Payne J.W., and Puto C. Adding asymmetrically dominated alternatives: Violations of regularity and the similarity hypothesis. J. Cons. Res. 9 (1982) 90-98
13. Iyengar S.S., and Lepper M.R. When choice is demotivating: Can one desire too much of a good thing?. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 79 (2000) 995-1006
14. Kandori M. Social norms and community enforcement. Rev. Econ. Stud. 72 (1992) 534-566
15. Lazear, E.P., Malmendier, U., Weber, R.A., 2006. Sorting in experiments with application to social preferences. Working paper 12041, NBER
16. List J.A. On the interpretation of giving in dictator games. J. Polit. Economy 115 (2007) 482-493
17. Payne J.W., Bettman J.R., and Johnson E.J. Behavioral decision research: A constructive processing perspective. Ann. Rev. Psych. 43 (1992) 87-131
18. Payne J.W., Bettman J.R., and Johnson E.J. The Adaptive Decision Maker (1993), Cambridge Univ. Press, Boston
19. Tversky A., and Simonson I. Context-dependent preferences. Manage. Sci. 39 (1993) 1179-1189