Inequality and visibility of wealth in experimental social networks

Nature

Volumn 526, Issue 7573, 2015, Pages 426-429

  Nishi, Akihiro ^a,b   Shirado, Hirokazu ^a,b   Rand, David G ^a,b   Christakis, Nicholas A ^a,b  

^a Yale University   (United States)

^b YALE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BEHAVIORAL RESPONSE; ECONOMIC DIVERSIFICATION; EQUITY; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; PUBLIC GOODS; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; SOCIAL NETWORK; SOCIAL STATUS;

AFFECT; ARTICLE; COOPERATION; ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT; HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; SOCIAL NETWORK; SOCIAL STRUCTURE; SOCIAL WELFARE; SOCIOECONOMICS; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; GAME; INCOME; INTERNET; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; PSYCHOLOGY; STATISTICAL MODEL;

COOPERATIVE BEHAVIOR; DISCLOSURE; GAMES, EXPERIMENTAL; HUMANS; INCOME; INTERNET; MODELS, ECONOMIC; SOCIAL NETWORKING; SOCIAL WELFARE; SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS;

EID: 84944320329     PISSN: 00280836     EISSN: 14764687     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/nature15392     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Dawes, C. T., Fowler, J. H., Johnson, T., McElreath, R. & Smirnov, O. Egalitarian motives in humans. Nature 446, 794-796 (2007).
2. Fehr, E., Bernhard, H. & Rockenbach, B. Egalitarianism in young children. Nature 454, 1079-1083 (2008).
3. Tricomi, E., Rangel, A., Camerer, C. F. & O'Doherty, J. P. Neural evidence for inequality-averse social preferences. Nature 463, 1089-1109 (2010).
4. Dawes, C. T. et al. Neural basis of egalitarian behavior. Proc.Natl Acad. Sci.USA 109, 6479-6483 (2012).
5. Engelmann, D. & Strobel, M. Inequality aversion, efficiency, and maximin preferences in simple distribution experiments. Am. Econ. Rev. 94, 857-869 (2004).
6. Piketty, T. & Saez, E. Inequality in the long run. Science 344, 838-843 (2014).
7. Apicella, C. L., Marlowe, F. W., Fowler, J. H. & Christakis, N. A. Social networks and cooperation in hunter-gatherers. Nature 481, 497-501 (2012).
8. Apicella, C. L., Azevedo, E.M., Christakis, N. A. & Fowler, J.H. Evolutionary origins of the endowment effect: evidence from hunter-gatherers. Am. Econ. Rev. 104, 1793-1805 (2014).
9. Smith, E. A. et al. Wealth transmission and inequality among hunter-gatherers. Curr. Anthropol. 51, 19-34 (2010).
10. Rand, D. G., Arbesman, S. & Christakis, N. A. Dynamic social networks promote cooperation in experiments with humans. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 19193-19198 (2011).
11. Shirado, H., Fu, F., Fowler, J. H. & Christakis, N. A. Quality versus quantity of social ties in experimental cooperative networks. Nature Commun. 4, 2814 (2013).
12. Rand, D. G., Nowak, M. A., Fowler, J. H. & Christakis, N. A. Static network structure can stabilize human cooperation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 17093-17098 (2014).
13. Gracia-Lázaro, C. et al. Heterogeneous networks do not promote cooperation when humans play a Prisoner's Dilemma. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 12922-12926 (2012).
14. Allison, P. D. Measures of inequality. Am. Sociol. Rev. 43, 865-880 (1978).
15. Calvó-Armengol, A.& Jackson, M. O. The effects of social networks onemployment and inequality. Am. Econ. Rev. 94, 426-454 (2004).
16. Cherry, T. L., Kroll, S. & Shogren, J. F. The impact of endowment heterogeneity and origin on public good contributions: evidence from the lab. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 57, 357-365 (2005).
17. Chan, K. S., Mestelman, S., Moir, R. &Muller, R. A. Heterogeneity and the voluntary provision of public goods. Exp. Econ. 2, 5-30 (1999).
18. Isaac, R. M. & Walker, J. M. Group-size effects in public-goods provision: the voluntary contributions mechanism. Quart. J. Econ. 103, 179-199 (1988).
19. Sadrieh, A.& Verbon, H. A. A. Inequality, cooperation, and growth: an experimental study. Eur. Econ. Rev. 50, 1197-1222 (2006).
20. Hackett, S., Schlager, E. & Walker, J. The role of communication in resolving common dilemmas: experimental evidence with heterogeneous appropriators. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 27, 99-126 (1994).
21. Abou Chakra,M. & Traulsen, A. Under high stakes and uncertainty the rich should lend the poor a helping hand. J. Theor. Biol. 341, 123-130 (2014).
22. Wang, J., Fu, F. & Wang, L. Effects of heterogeneous wealth distribution on public cooperation with collective risk. Phys. Rev. E 82 (2010).
23. Kun, Á.& Dieckmann, U. Resource heterogeneity can facilitate cooperation. Nature Commun. 4, 2453 (2013).
24. Testart, A. The significance of food storage among hunter-gatherers: residence patterns, population-densities, and social inequalities. Curr. Anthropol. 23, 523-537 (1982).
25. Gilbert, D. T., Giesler, R. B. & Morris, K. A. When comparisons arise. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 69, 227-236 (1995).
26. Clark, A. E. & Oswald, A. J. Satisfaction and comparison income. J. Public Econ. 61, 359-381 (1996).
27. Loughnan, S. et al. Economic inequality is linked to biased self-perception. Psychol. Sci. 22, 1254-1258 (2011).
28. Moav, O. & Neeman, Z. Saving rates and poverty: the role of conspicuous consumption and human capital. Econ. J. 122, 933-956 (2012).
29. Kuziemko, I., Buell, R. W., Reich, T. & Norton, M. I. "Last-place aversion": evidence and redistributive implications. Quart. J. Econ. 129, 105-149 (2014).
30. Veblen, T. The Theory of the Leisure Class: an Economic Study of Institutions (Macmillan, 1899).