Compliance by Believing: An Experimental Exploration on Social Norms and Impartial Agreements

The main contribution of this paper is twofold. First of all, it focuses on the decisional process that leads to the creation of a social norm. Secondly, it analyses the mechanisms through which subjects conform their behaviour to the norm. In particular, our aim is to study the role and the nature of Normative and Empirical Expectations and their influence on people's decisions. The tool is the Exclusion Game, a sort of 'triple mini-dictator game'. It represents a situation where 3 subjects - players A - have to decide how to allocate a sum S among themselves and a fourth subject - player B - who has no decisional power. The experiment consists of three treatments. In the Baseline Treatment participants are randomly distributed in groups of four players and play the Exclusion Game. In the Agreement Treatment in each group participants are invited to vote for a specific non-binding allocation rule before playing the Exclusion Game. In the Outsider Treatment, after the voting procedure and before playing the Exclusion Game, a player A for each group (the outsider) is reassigned to a different group and instructed about the rule chosen by the new group. In all the treatments, at the end of the game and before players are informed about the decisions taken during the Exclusion Game by the other co-players, first order and second order expectations (both normative and empirical) are elicited through a brief questionnaire. The first result we obtained is that subjects' choices are in line with their empirical (not normative) expectations. The second result is that even a non-binding agreement induces convergence of empirical expectations - and, consequently, of choices. The third results is that expectation of conformity is higher in the partner protocol. This implies that a single outsider breaks the 'trust and cooperation' equilibrium.

[1]  Erin L. Krupka,et al.  The Focusing and Informaitonal Effects of Norms on Pro-Social Behavior , 2006 .

[2]  Gary E. Bolton,et al.  Strategy and Equity: An ERC-Analysis of the Güth-van Damme Game. , 1998, Journal of mathematical psychology.

[3]  Marco Bee,et al.  FIRMS' BANKRUPTCY AND TURNOVER IN A MACROECONOMY , 2004 .

[4]  Colin Camerer Behavioral Game Theory: Experiments in Strategic Interaction , 2003 .

[5]  E. Fehr A Theory of Fairness, Competition and Cooperation , 1998 .

[6]  Luigi Marengo,et al.  Decomposability and modularity of economic interactions , 2001 .

[7]  Giuseppe Danese,et al.  The Sustainable Enterprise: The Multi-Fiduciary Perspective to the EU Sustainability Strategy , 2008 .

[8]  Ian Stewart,et al.  Deciding the undecidable , 1991, Nature.

[9]  U. Fischbacher z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments , 1999 .

[10]  E. Fehr,et al.  Cooperation and Punishment in Public Goods Experiments , 1999, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[11]  K. Velupillai Morishima's Nonlinear Model of the Cycle: Simplifications and Generalizations , 2005 .

[12]  L. Bonatti,et al.  Evolution of preferences and cross-country differences in time devoted to market work , 2008 .

[13]  M. Rabin,et al.  Understanding Social Preference with Simple Tests , 2001 .

[14]  Pierpaolo Battigalli,et al.  Guilt in Games , 2007 .

[15]  M. Rabin Published by: American , 2022 .

[16]  Martin Dufwenberg,et al.  Promises and Partnership , 2006 .

[17]  Mauro Gallegati,et al.  A look at the relationship between industrial dynamics and aggregate fluctuations , 2009 .

[18]  C. Novi An Economic Evaluation of Life-Style and Air-pollution-related Damages: Results from the BRFSS , 2007 .

[19]  Erin L. Krupka,et al.  The Focusing and Informational Effects of Norms on Pro-Social Behavior , 2007, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[20]  Carlo Borzaga,et al.  Worker involvement in entrepreneurial nonprofit organizations. Toward a new assessment of workers' perceived satisfaction and fairness , 2004 .

[21]  C. Bicchieri The grammar of society: the nature and dynamics of social norms , 2005 .

[22]  Cristina Bicchieri,et al.  Do the Right Thing: But Only If Others Do So , 2007 .

[23]  Lorenzo Sacconi,et al.  The Constitution of the Not-For-Profit Organisation: Reciprocal Conformity to Morality , 2005 .

[24]  Roberto Tamborini,et al.  Rescuing the LM (and the Money Market) in a Modern Macro Course , 2007 .

[25]  Roberto Benedetti,et al.  A Tree-Based Approach to Forming Strata in Multipurpose Business Surveys , 2005 .

[26]  A. Paletto,et al.  Natural disturbances and natural hazards in mountain forests: a framework for the economic valuation , 2008 .

[27]  Gary E. Bolton A Comparative Model of Bargaining: Theory and Evidence , 1991 .

[28]  Conformity and Reciprocity in the 'Exclusion Game': An Experimental Investigation , 2005 .

[29]  Ernst Fehr,et al.  Theories of Fairness and Reciprocity , 2001 .

[30]  J. Geanakoplos,et al.  Psychological games and sequential rationality , 1989 .

[31]  E. Lavernia,et al.  An experimental investigation , 1992, Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A.

[32]  Marco Faillo,et al.  Norm compliance: the contribution of behavioral economics models , 2007 .

[33]  Ernst Fehr,et al.  Third Party Punishment and Social Norms , 2004 .

[34]  M. Leffler Bush's Foreign Policy , 2004 .

[35]  Ernst Fehr,et al.  Theories of Fairness and Reciprocity , 2001 .

[36]  Marco Faillo,et al.  Conformity, reciprocity and the sense of justice. How social contract-based preferences and beliefs explain norm compliance: the experimental evidence , 2010 .