The Politics of Interpersonal Trust and Reciprocity: An Experimental Approach

Political Behavior

Volumn 35, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 43-63

  Carlin, Ryan E ^a   Love, Gregory J ^b  

^a GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MISSISSIPPI   (United States)

Author keywords

Behavioral economics; Experiments; Interpersonal trust; Partisanship; Political psychology

Indexed keywords

EID: 84874109035     PISSN: 01909320     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11109-011-9181-x     Document Type: Article

References (103)

1. Abramowitz, A. I., & Saunders, K. L. (2008). Is polarization a myth? Journal of Politics, 70(2), 542-555.
2. Almond, G. A., & Verba, S. (1963). The civic culture: Political attitudes and democracy in five nations. Scranton, PA: Princeton University Press.
3. Arrow, K. J. (1974). The limits of organization. New York: Norton.
4. Ashraf, N., Bohnet, I., & Piankov, N. (2006). Decomposing trust and trustworthiness. Experimental Economics, 9(3), 193-208.
5. Axelrod, R. (1984). The evolution of cooperation. New York: Basic Books.
6. Bartels, L. M. (1996). Uninformed voters: Information effects in presidential elections. American Journal of Political Science, 40(1), 194-230.
7. Bartels, L. M. (2002). Beyond the running tally: Partisan bias in political perceptions. Political Behavior, 24(2), 117-150.
8. Berg, J., Dickaut, J., & McCabe, K. (1995). Trust, reciprocity, and social history. Games and Economic Behavior, 10(1), 122-142.
9. Brewer, M. D. (2005). The rise of partisanship and the expansion of partisan conflict within the American electorate. Political Research Quarterly, 58(2), 219-229.
10. Buchan, N. R., Croson, R. T. A., & Solnick, S. (2008). Trust and gender: An examination of behavior and beliefs in the investment game. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 68(3-4), 466-476.
11. Burns, J. (2006). Racial stereotypes, stigma and trust in post-apartheid South Africa. Economic Modeling, 23(5), 805-821.
12. Camerer, C. F., & Hogarth, R. M. (1999). The effects of financial incentives in experiments: A review and capital-labor-production framework. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 19(1), 7-42.
13. Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, W. E., & Stokes, D. E. (1960). The American voter. New York: Wiley.
14. Cárdenas, J. C., & Carpenter, J. (2008). Behavioral development economics: Lessons from field labs in the developing world. Journal of Development Studies, 44(3), 311-338.
15. Cardenas, J. C., Chong, A., & Ñopo, H. (2009). To what extent do Latin Americans Trust, reciprocate, and cooperate? Evidence from experiments in six Latin American countries. Economia, 9(2), 45-88.
16. Castillo, M., & Petrie, R. (2010). Discrimination in the lab: Does information trump appearance? Games and Economic Behavior, 68(1), 50-59.
17. Chaiken, S., & Trope, Y. (1999). Dual-process theories in social psychology. New York: Guilford Press.
18. Chandra, K. (2003). Why ethnic parties succeed: Patronage and ethnic headcounts in India. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
19. Charness, G., & Rabin, M. (2005). Expressed preferences and behavior in experimental games. Game and Economic Behavior, 53(2), 151-169.
20. Chaudhuri, A., & Gangadharan, L. (2003). Sending money in the trust game: Trust or other regarding preferences? Working Paper, University of Melbourne.
21. Coleman, J. S. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
22. Conover, P. J., & Feldman, S. (1981). The origins and meaning of liberal/conservative self-identifications. American Journal of Political Science, 25, 617-645.
23. Cox, J. C. (2004). How to identify trust and reciprocity. Games and Economic Behavior, 46(2), 260-281.
24. Dahl, R. A. (1971). Polyarchy: Participation and opposition. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
25. Dahl, R. A. (1997). Toward democracy-A journey, reflections: 1940-1997. Berkeley, CA: Institute of Government Studies Press.
26. Dawes, C. T., Loewen, P. J., & Fowler, J. H. (Forthcoming). Social preferences and political participation. Journal of Politics 73, 845-856.
27. DiMaggio, P., Evans, J. W., & Bryson, B. (1996). Have Americans' social attitudes become more polarized? American Journal of Sociology, 102(3), 690-755.
28. Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. New York: Harper & Row.
29. Druckman, J. N., & Kam, C. D. (2009). Students as experimental participants: A defense of the "Narrow Data Base". Working Paper.
30. Eckel, C. C., & Petrie, R. (2011). Face value. American Economic Review, 101(4), 1497-1513.
31. Eckel, C. C., & Wilson, R. K. (2003). The human face of game theory. In E. Ostrom & J. M. Walker (Eds.), Trust and reciprocity: Interdisciplinary lessons from experimental research (pp. 245-274). New York: Sage.
32. Eckel, C. C., & Wilson, R. K. (2006). Internet cautions: Experimental games with internet partners. Experimental Economics, 9(1), 53-66.
33. Evans, J. W. (2003). Have Americans' attitudes become more polarized?-an update. Social Science Quarterly, 84(1), 71-90.
34. Fehr, E., Fischbacher, U., von Rosenbladt, B., Schupp, J., & Wagner, G. (2003). A nation-wide laboratory: Examining trust and trustworthiness by integrating behavioral experiments into representative surveys. IZA Discussion Paper No. 715.
35. Fershtman, C., & Gneezy, U. (2001). Discrimination in a segmented society: An experimental approach. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116(1), 351-377.
36. Fershtman, C., Gneezy, U., & Verboven, F. (2005). Discrimination and nepotism: The efficiency of the anonymity rule. Journal of Legal Studies, 34(2), 371-396.
37. Fiorina, M. P. (1981). Retrospective voting in American national elections. New Haven: Yale University Press.
38. Fiornia, M. P., Abrams, S. J., & Pope, J. C. (2006). Culture War? The myth of a polarized America (2nd ed.). New York: Pearson Longman.
39. Fowler, J. H. (2006). Altruism and turnout. Journal of Politics, 68(3), 674-683.
40. Fowler, J. H., & Kam, C. D. (2007). Beyond the self: Social identity, altruism, and political participation. Journal of Politics, 69(3), 813-827.
41. Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust: The social virtues and the creation of prosperity. New York: Free Press.
42. Gabarino, E., & Slonim, R. (2009). The robustness of trust and reciprocity across a heterogeneous U. S. population. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 69(3), 226-240.
43. Glaeser, E. L., Laibson, D. I., Scheinkman, J., & Soutter, C. L. (2000). Measuring trust. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 115(3), 811-846.
44. González, R., Manzi, J., Saiz, J., Brewer, M., Torres, D., Aravena, M. T., et al. (2008). Interparty attitudes in Chile: Coalitions as superordinate identities. Political Psychology, 29(1), 93-118.
45. Goren, P. (2002). Character weakness, partisan bias, and presidential evaluation. American Journal of Political Science, 46(3), 627-641.
46. Goren, P., Federico, C. M., & Caul Kittilson, M. (2009). Source cues, partisan identities, and political value expression. American Journal of Political Science, 53(4), 805-820.
47. Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25(2), 161-178.
48. Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481-510.
49. Green, D., Palmquist, B., & Schickler, E. (2002). Partisan hearts and minds. New Haven: Yale University Press.
50. Greene, S. (1999). Understanding party identification: A social identity approach. Political Psychology, 20(2), 393-403.
51. Greene, S. (2004). Social identity theory and party identification. Social Science Quarterly, 85(1), 136-153.
52. Haile, D., Sadrieh, A., & Verbon, H. A. A. (2008). Cross-racial envy and underinvestment in South African partnerships. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 32(5), 703-724.
53. Harris, L. T., McClure, S. M., van den Bos, W., Cohen, J. D., & Fiske, S. T. (2007). Regions of the MPFC differentially tuned to social and nonsocial affective evaluation. Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Neuroscience, 7(4), 309-316.
54. Henrich, J., Boyd, R., Bowles, S., Camerer, C., Fehr, E., & Gintis, H. (Eds.). (2004). Foundations of human sociality. New York: Oxford University Press.
55. Hetherington, M. J. (2001). Resurgent mass partisanship: The role of elite polarization. American Political Science Review, 95(3), 619-632.
56. Hibbing, J. R., & Theiss-Morse, E. (1995). Congress as public enemy. New York: Cambridge University House.
57. Hibbing, J. R., & Theiss-Morse, E. (2002). Stealth democracy: Americans' beliefs about how government should work. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
58. Huckfeldt, R., Levine, J., Morgan, W., & Sprague, J. T. (1999). Accessibility and the political utility of partisan and ideological orientations. American Journal of Political Science, 43(3), 888-911.
59. Inglehart, R. (1988). The renaissance of political culture. American Political Science Review, 82(4), 1203-1230.
60. Jacoby, W. G. (1988). The impact of party identification on issue attitudes. American Journal of Political Science, 32(3), 643-661.
61. Johansson-Stenman, O., Mahmud, M., & Martinsson, P. (2005). Does stake size matter in trust games? Economic Letters, 88, 365-369.
62. Johansson-Stenman, O., Mahmud, M., & Martinsson, P. (2009). Trust and religion: Experimental evidence from rural Bangladesh. Economica, 79(303), 462-485.
63. Johnson, N. D., & Mislin, A. (2009). Cultures of kindness: A meta-analysis of trust game experiments. Working Paper 09-15, Mercatus Center, George Mason University.
64. Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (Eds.). (1982). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. New York: Cambridge University Press.
65. Keele, L., McConnaughy, C., & White, I. (2008). Statistical inference for experiments. Working Paper Ohio State University.
66. Koch, J. W. (2001). When parties and candidates collide: Citizen perceptions of house candidates' positions on abortion. Public Opinion Quarterly, 65(1), 1-21.
67. Kollock, P. (1993). 'An eye for an eye leaves everyone blind': Cooperation and accounting systems. American Sociological Review, 58(6), 768-786.
68. Krueger, F., McCabe, K., Moll, J., Kriegeskorte, N., Zahm, R., Strenziok, M., et al. (2007). Neural correlates of trust. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104(50), 20084-20089.
69. Kuklinski, J. H., & Hurley, N. L. (1994). On hearing and interpreting political messages: A cautionary tale of citizen cue-taking. Journal of Politics, 56(3), 729-751.
70. Lau, R. R., & Redlawsk, D. P. (2001). Advantages and disadvantages of cognitive heuristics in political decision making. American Journal of Political Science, 45(4), 951-971.
71. Layman, G. C., Carsey, T. M., Green, J. C., Herrera, R., & Cooperman, R. (2010). Party polarization, party commitment and conflict extension among American party activists. American Political Science Review, 102(2), 324-346.
72. Levi, M. (1998). A state of trust. In V. Braithwaite & M. Levi (Eds.), Trust and governance. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
73. Lev-On, A., Chavez, A., & Bicchieri, C. (2010). Group and dyadic communication in the trust game. Rationality and Society, 22(1), 37-54.
74. Lodge, M., & Hamill, R. (1986). A partisan schema for political information processing. American Political Science Review, 80(2), 505-519.
75. Loewen, P. J. (2010). Affinity, antipathy and political participation: How our concern for others makes us vote. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 43(3), 661-687.
76. Lupia, A. (1994). Shortcuts versus encyclopedias: Information and voting behavior in California insurance reform elections. American Political Science Review, 88(1), 63-76.
77. Lupia, A., & McCubbins, M. D. (1998). The democratic dilemma: Can citizens learn what they need to know?. New York: Cambridge University Press.
78. McGarty, C., Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., David, B., & Wetherell, M. S. (1992). Group polarization as conformity to the prototypical group member. British Journal of Social Psychology, 31(1), 1-19.
79. Miller, A. S., & Mitamura, T. (2003). Are surveys on trust trustworthy. Social Psychology Quarterly, 66(1), 62-70.
80. Mondak, J. T. (1993). Public opinion and heuristic processing of source cues. Political Behavior, 15(2), 167-192.
81. Morton, R. B., & Williams, K. C. (2008). Experimentation in political science. In J. Box-Steffensmeier, D. Collier, & H. Brady (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of political methodology (pp. 339-356). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
82. Nannestad, P. (2008). What have we learned about generalized trust, if anything. Annual Review of Political Science, 11, 413-436.
83. Olson, M. (1965). The logic of collective action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
84. Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. New York: Cambridge University Press.
85. Paxton, P. (2002). Social capital and democracy: An interdependent relationship. American Sociological Review, 67(2), 254-277.
86. Popkin, S. L. (1994). The reasoning voter: Communication and persuasion in presidential campaigns (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
87. Putnam, R. D. (1993). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
88. Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon and Schuster.
89. Rahn, W. (1993). The role of partisan stereotypes in information processing about political candidates. American Journal of Political Science, 37(2), 472-496.
90. Renno, L., & Castro, H. (2009). Assessing the validity and reliability of interpersonal trust measures in cross-national surveys. Latin American Public Opinion Project Working Paper Series.
91. Roth, A. E., & Rothblum, U. G. (1982). Risk aversion and nash's solution for bargaining games with risky outcomes. Econometrica, 50(3), 639-647.
92. Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R. S., & Camerer, C. (1998). Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 393-404.
93. Scharlemann, J. P. W., Eckel, C. C., Kacelnik, A., & Wilson, R. K. (2001). The value of a smile: Game theory with a human face. Journal of Economic Psychology, 22(5), 617-640.
94. Schweitzer, M. E., Hershey, J. C., & Bradlow, E. T. (2006). Promises and lies: Restoring violated trust. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 101(1), 1-19.
95. Science. (2005). What we don't know. Special Section, pp. 75-102.
96. Seabright, P. (2010). The company of strangers. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
97. Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
98. Tajfel, H. (1978). Social categorization, social identity, and social comparisons. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Differentiation between social groups (pp. 61-78). London: Academic Press.
99. Turner, J. (2007). The messenger overwhelming the message: Ideological cues and perceptions of bias in television news. Political Behavior, 29, 441-464.
100. Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
101. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124-1131.
102. van Den Bos, W., Dijk, E., Westenberg, M., Rombouts, S. A. R. B., & Crone, E. A. (2009). What motivates repayment? Neural correlates of reciprocity in the trust game. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 4(3), 294-304.
103. Wilson, R. K., & Eckel, C. C. (2006). Judging a book by its cover. Political Research Quarterly, 59(2), 189-202.