Experimental subjects are not different

Scientific Reports

Volumn 3, Issue , 2013, Pages

  Exadaktylos, Filippos ^a   Espín, Antonio M ^b   Brañas Garza, Pablo ^c  

^a ISTANBUL BILGI UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GRANADA   (Spain)

^c MIDDLESEX UNIVERSITY BUSINESS SCHOOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84874293683     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20452322     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/srep01213     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Wedekind, C. & Milinski, M. Cooperation through image scoring in humans. Science 289, 850-852 (2000).
2. Milinski, M., Semmann, D. & Krambeck, H. J. Reputation helps solve the 'tragedy of the commons'. Nature 415, 424-426 (2002).
3. Semmann, D., Krambeck, H. J. & Milinski, M. Volunteering leads to rock-paper-scissors dynamics in a public goods game. Nature 425, 390-393 (2003).
4. Dreber, A., Rand, D. G., Fudenberg, D. & Nowak, M. A. Winners don't punish. Nature 452, 348-351 (2008).
5. Traulsen, A., Semmann, D., Sommerfeld, R. D., Krambeck, H. J. & Milinski, M. strategy updating in evolutionary games. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 107, 2962-2966 (2010).
6. Rand, D. G. & Nowak, M. A. The evolution of antisocial punishment in optional public goods games. Nature Commun. 2, 434 (2011).
7. Crone, E.A., Somsen, R.J. M., Beek, B.V. & Van Der Molen, M.W. Heart rate and skin conductance analysis of antecendents and consequences of decision making. Psychophysiology 41, 531-540 (2004).
8. Li, J., McClure, S. M., King-Casas, B. & Montague, P. R. Policy adjustment in a dynamic economic game. PLoS ONE 1, e103 (2006).
9. Van den Bergh, B. & Dewitte, S. Digit ratio (2D:4D) moderates the impact of sexual cues on men's decisions in ultimatum games. P. Roy. Soc. Lond. B. Bio. 273, 2091-2095 (2006).
10. van't Wout, M., Kahn, R. S., Sanfey, A. G. & Aleman, A. Affective state and decision-making in the ultimatum game. Exp. Brain Res. 169, 564-568 (2006).
11. Burnham, C. T. High-testosterone men reject low ultimatum game offers. P. Roy. Soc. Lond. B. Bio. 274, 2327-2330 (2007).
12. Chapman, H. A., Kim, D. A., Susskind, J. M. & Anderson, A. K. In bad taste: evidence for the oral origins of moral disgust. Science 323, 1222-1226 (2009).
13. Elliott, R., Friston, K. J. & Dolan, R. J. Dissociable neural responses in human reward systems. J. Neurosci. 20, 6159-6165 (2000).
14. Breiter, H. C., Aharon, I., Kahneman, D., Dale, A. & Shizgal, P. Functional imaging of neural responses to expectancy and experience of monetary gains and losses. Neuron 30, 619-639 (2001).
15. O'Doherty, J., Kringelbach, M. L., Rolls, E. T., Hornack, J. & Andrews, C. Abstract reward and punishment representations in the human orbitofrontal cortex. Nat. Neurosci. 4, 95-102 (2001).
16. Rilling, J. K., Gutman, D. A., Zeh, T. R., Pagnoni, G., Berns, G. S. & Kilts, C. D. A neural basis for social cooperation. Neuron 35, 395-405 (2002).
17. Sanfey, G. A. Social decision-making: insights from game theory and neuroscience. Science 318, 598-602 (2007).
18. Lee, D. D. Game theory and neural basis of social decision making. Nat. Neurosci. 11, 404-409 (2008).
19. Szabó, G. & Fáth, G. Evolutionary games on graphs. Phys. Rep. 446, 97-216 (2007).
20. Roca, J., Cuesta, A. & Sánchez, A. Evolutionary game theory: Temporal and spatial effects beyond replicator dynamics. Physics of Life Reviews 6, 208-249 (2009).
21. Grujić, J., Fosco, C., Araujo, L., Cuesta, J. A. & Sánchez, A. Social experiments in the mesoscale: humans playing a spatial Prisoner's Dilemma.PLoS ONE 5, e13749 (2010).
22. Perc, M. & Szolnoki, A. Coevolutionary games-a mini review. BioSystems 99, 109-125 (2010).
23. Suri, S. & Watts, D.J. Cooperation and contagioninWeb-based, networked public goods experiments. PLoS ONE 6, e16836 (2011).
24. Garcia-Lázaro, C. et al. Heterogeneous networks do not promote cooperation when humansplay a Prisoner's Dilemma. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 109, 12922-12926 (2012).
25. Levitt, S. D. & List, J. A. What do laboratory experiments measuring social preferences reveal about the real world? J. Econ. Perspec. 21, 153-174 (2007).
26. Levitt, S. D. & List, J. A. Homo economicus evolves. Science 319, 909-910 (2008).
27. Falk, A. & Heckman, J. Lab experiments are a major source of knowledge in the social sciences. Science 326, 535-38 (2009).
28. Henrich, J., Heine, S. J. & Norenzayan, A. The weirdest people in the world? Behav. Brain Sci. 33, 61-135 (2010).
29. Janssen, M.A., Holahan, R., Lee, A. & Ostrom, E. Lab experiments for the study of social-ecological systems. Science 328, 613-617 (2010).
30. Paolacci, G., Chandler, J. & Ipeirotis, P. G. Running experiments on amazon mechanical turk. Judgment and Decision Making 5, 411-419 (2010).
31. Rand, D. G. The promise of mechanical turk: how online labor markets can help theorists run behavioral experiments. J. Theor. Biol. 299, 172-179 (2011).
32. Cooper, D., Kagel, J. H., Lo, W. & Gu, Q. L. Gaming against managers in incentive systems: experiments with Chinese managers and Chinese students. Amer. Econ. Rev. 89, 781-804 (1999).
33. Fehr, E. & List, J. A. The hidden costs and returns of incentives-trust and trustworthiness among CEOs. Journal of the European Economic Association 2, 743-771 (2004).
34. Haigh, M. S. & List, J. A. Do professional traders exhibit myopic loss aversion? J. Finance 60, 523-534 (2005).
35. Cárdenas, J. C. Groups, commons and regulations: experiments with villagers and students in Colombia. In Psychology, Rationality and Economic Behavior: Challenging Standard Assumptions, eds. Agarwal, B. & Vercelli, A. pp. 242-270. Palgrave, London (2005).
36. Palacios-Huerta, I. & Volij, O. Field centipedes. Amer. Econ. Rev. 99, 1619-1635 (2009).
37. Harrison, G. W. & List, J. A. Field experiments. J. Econ. Lit. 92, 1009-1055 (2004).
38. Harrison, G. W., Lau, M. I. & Williams, M. B. Estimating individual discount rates in Denmark: a field experiment. Amer. Econ. Rev. 92, 1606-1617 (2002).
39. Fehr, E., Fischbacher, U., von Rosenbladt, B., Schupp, J. & Wagner, G. A nationwide laboratory examining trust and trustworthiness by integrating behavioral experiments into representative surveys. Schmollers Jahrbuch 122, 519-542 (2003).
40. Gächter, S., Herrmann, B. & Thöni, C. Trust, voluntary cooperation and socio-economic background: survey and experimental evidence.J. Econ. Beh. Organ. 55, 505-531 (2004).
41. Bellemare, C., Kröger, S. & van Soest, A. Measuring inequity aversion in a heterogeneous population using experimental decisions and subjective probabilities. Econometrica 76, 815-839 (2008).
42. Egas, M. & Riedl, A. The economics of altruistic punishment and the maintenance of cooperation. P. Roy. Soc. Lond. B. Bio. 275, 871-878 (2008).
43. Dohmen, T., Falk, A., Huffman, D. & Sunde, U. Are risk aversion and impatience related to cognitive ability? Amer. Econ. Rev. 100, 1238-1260 (2010).
44. Carpenter, J. P., Burks, S. & Verhoogen, E. Comparing students to eorkers: the effects of stakes, social framing, and demographics on bargaining outcomes. In Field Experiments in Economics, eds. Carpenter, J., Harrison, G. and List, J. A. pp. 261-290, JAI Press, Stamford, CT (2005).
45. Carpenter, J. P., Connolly, C. & Myers, C. Altruistic behavior in a representative dictator experiment. Exper. Econ. 11, 282-298 (2008).
46. Burks, S., Carpenter, J. P. & Goette, L. Performance pay and worker cooperation: evidence from an artefactual field experiment. J. Econ. Beh. Organ. 70, 458-469 (2009).
47. Anderson, J. et al. Self-selection and variations in the laboratory measurement of other-regarding preferences across subject pools: evidence from one college student and two adult samples. Exper. Econ. (in press).
48. Bellemare, C. & Kröger, S. On representative social capital. Europ. Econ. Rev. 51, 183-202 (2007).
49. Falk, A., Meier, S. & Zehnder, C. Do lab experiments misrepresent social preferences? The case of self-selected student samples. Journal of European Economic Association (in press).
50. Eckel, C. C. & Grossman, P. J. Volunteers and pseudo-volunteers: the effect of recruitment method in dictator experiments. Exper. Econ. 3, 107-120 (2000).
51. Cleave, B. L., Nikiforakis, N. & Slonim, R. Is there selection bias in laboratory experiments? The case of social and risk preferences. Exper. Econ. (in press).
52. Zizzo, J. D. Experimenter Demand Effects inEconomic Experiments. Exper. Econ. 13, 75-98 (2010).
53. Ai, C. & Norton, E. Interaction terms in logit and probit models. Econ. Letters 80, 123-129 (2003).
54. Van Lange, P. A. M., Schippers, M. & Balliet, D. Who volunteers in psychology experiments? An empirical review of prosocial motivation in volunteering. Pers. Indiv. Differ. 51, 279-284 (2011).
55. McClintock, C. G. & Allison, S. T. Social value orientation and helping behavior. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 19, 353-62 (1989).
56. Greiner, B. Anonline recruitment system for economic experiments. InForschung und wissenschaftliches Rechnen 2003, eds. Kremer, K. & Macho, V., pp. 79-93, GWDG Bericht 63. Gesellschaft für Wissenschaftliche Datenverarbeitung, Göttingen (2004).
57. Forsythe, R., Horowitz, J. L., Savin, N. E. & Sefton, M. Fairness in simple bargaining experiments. Game Econ. Behav. 6, 347-69 (1994).
58. Güth, W., Schmittberger, R. & Schwarze, B. An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining. J. Econ. Beh. Organ. 3, 367-88 (1982).
59. Mitzkewitz, M. & Nagel, R. Experimental results on ultimatum games with incomplete information. Int. J. Game Theory 22, 171-98 (1993).
60. Ermisch, J., Gambetta, D., Laurie, H., Siedler, T. & Noah Uhrig, S. C. Measuring people's trust. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. A (Statistics in Society) 172, 749-769 (2009).