Cooperation in public good games. Calculated or confused?

Research output: Journal contributionsJournal articlesResearchpeer-review

Authors

Some recent experimental papers have claimed that contribution decisions in a public goods game (PGG) are more likely to be cooperative if based on intuition rather than reflection. In light of conflicting findings, this paper (i) reinvestigates the behavioral impact of so-called cognitive style in the PGG; and (ii) connects it with an earlier literature on the role of cognitive failure (confusion). This is motivated by the possibility that the method of time pressure, commonly used to identify cognitive style, invites confusion as a confounding factor. Two channels for such confounds are identified and experimentally tested: A heterogeneous treatment effect of time pressure depending on subjects’ confusion status and a direct impact of time pressure on subjects’ likelihood of being confused. Our reinvestigation of the behavioral impact of time pressure confirms that cognitive style matters, but that deliberation rather than intuition drives cooperation. The confounding effect of confusion is not found to be direct, but to operate through a heterogeneous treatment effect. Time pressure selectively reduces average contributions among those subjects whose contributions can confidently be interpreted as cooperative rather than confused.

Original languageEnglish
JournalEuropean Economic Review
Volume107
Pages (from-to)185-203
Number of pages19
ISSN0014-2921
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 01.08.2018
Externally publishedYes

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
The authors gratefully acknowledge financial support by the German Ministry for Education and Research under grant OIUV1012. They are furthermore thankful for helpful comments by seminar participants at the ESA Zurich, the HSC New York, the ZEW Mannheim, the University of Chicago, the University of Sterling, the IMEBESS Oxford and the SBRCC workshop in Kiel.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 Elsevier B.V.

    Research areas

  • Confusion, Cooperation, Experiment, Public goods games, Time pressure
  • Economics

Recently viewed

Publications

  1. Mit der Zauberformel V4 + E4 kooperieren
  2. Einleitung: Warum hacken?
  3. Polymorphic microsatellite loci in the endangered butterfly Lycaena helle (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae)
  4. Geld reinstecken und Hoffen
  5. Zur Krise des „poeta vates“ im Biedermeier.
  6. Inter- und transdisziplinäre Lehrforschung
  7. Rethinking Chemistry for a circular economy
  8. Frauen im Männerknast
  9. Mit den Simpsons über das Fernsehen nachdenken
  10. Impact of early childhood education settings on the systems thinking skills of preschool children through the lens of Bronfenbrenner's theory
  11. Smart or selfish - When smart guys finish nice
  12. Regulating Exceptions for Research and Exploratory Fishing in Southern Ocean Marine Protected Areas
  13. Einleitung
  14. Readings in Twenty-First-Century European literatures
  15. ‘You can't be green if you're in the red’
  16. Landwirtschaft:
  17. Social support as a moderator of the relationship between work stressors and psychological dysfunctioning
  18. Localization of Passengers Inside Intelligent Vehicles by the Use of Ultra Wideband Radars
  19. Human trafficking in nairaland digital community
  20. Terra
  21. Art 156: Establishment of the Authority
  22. Assessment of Nonoccupational Exposure to DDT in the Tropics and the North
  23. Schutz des Kindeswohls - eine Aufgabe des Strafrechts?!
  24. Klimaschutz
  25. Entgrenzte Öffentlichkeit
  26. Grundkonzeption eines produktbezogenen Top-Runner Modells auf der EU-Ebene
  27. ‘We are all herd animals'
  28. Between Fostering and Outsourcing Educational Justice: The EU-Turkey Statement and its Impacts on the Education of "Refugee Students" in Turkey
  29. Barthes´ Gespenster
  30. Mathematikbezogene Angst
  31. Das Parlament der Dinge
  32. Brief for GSDR 2015: Transforming Higher Education for Sustainable Development
  33. Impact of prescribed burning on a heathland inhabiting spider community
  34. Mapping the European Commission Today
  35. Chemical Philosophy
  36. How much sustainability substance is in urban visions?