Can markets help?: applying market mechanisms to improve synchronous communication

There is a growing interest in applying market mechanisms to tackle everyday communication problems such as communication interruptions and communication overload. Prior analytic proofs have shown that a signaling and screening mechanism can make senders and recipients of messages better off. However, these proofs make certain assumptions that do not hold in real world environments. For example, these prior works assume that there are no transaction costs in a communication market and that monetary incentives are the only motivators in communication between strangers. This research builds upon prior analytic work and empirically tests the validity of the claim that signaling and screening mechanisms will improve communication welfare. Our results show that while these types of markets can indeed improve communication welfare, a simpler, less expressive fixed-price market can lead to higher welfare than a more expressive, variable pricing and screening mechanism. Findings from this study also provide valuable insights for technology designs. For example, these results suggest the need to reduce cognitive overhead in using communication markets.

[1]  J. Kagel,et al.  Handbook of Experimental Economics , 1997 .

[2]  J. Ledyard Public Goods: A Survey of Experimental Research , 1994 .

[3]  Benjamin E. Hermalin,et al.  Sender or Receiver: Who Should Pay to Exchange an Electronic Message?" RAND Journal of Economics , 2004 .

[4]  S. Fahlman Technical forum , 2002 .

[5]  D. Kahneman Maps of Bounded Rationality: Psychology for Behavioral Economics , 2003 .

[6]  R. Trivers The Evolution of Reciprocal Altruism , 1971, The Quarterly Review of Biology.

[7]  C. Daniel Batson,et al.  Compassion or Compliance: Alternative Dispositional Attributions for One's Helping Behavior* , 1979 .

[8]  James Morris,et al.  Pricing Electronic Mail to Solve the Problem of Spam , 2005, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[9]  Scott E. Fahlman,et al.  Selling interrupt rights: A way to control unwanted e-mail and telephone calls , 2002, IBM Syst. J..

[10]  R. Thaler The Winner s Curse , 1991 .

[11]  F. Hayek The economic nature of the firm: The use of knowledge in society , 1945 .

[12]  Sheizaf Rafaeli,et al.  Predictors of answer quality in online Q&A sites , 2008, CHI.

[13]  Steve Whittaker,et al.  The character, functions, and styles of instant messaging in the workplace , 2002, CSCW '02.

[14]  B. Krishnamurthy,et al.  SHRED : Spam Harassment Reduction via Economic Disincentives , 2004 .

[15]  Joan V. Robinson,et al.  The Nature of the Firm , 2004 .

[16]  E. Fehr,et al.  Do Incentive Contracts Crowd Out Voluntary Cooperation? , 2000 .

[17]  Barry Wellman,et al.  Instant Messaging for Collaboration: A Case Study of a High-Tech Firm , 2005, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[18]  Marshall W. Van Alstyne,et al.  An Economic Response to Unsolicited Communication , 2005 .

[19]  Moni Naor,et al.  Pricing via Processing or Combatting Junk Mail , 1992, CRYPTO.

[20]  Timothy Van Zandt,et al.  Information Overload in a Network of Targeted Communication , 2001 .

[21]  Germaine Greer,et al.  Hayek F A , 1968 .

[22]  James D. Herbsleb,et al.  What is chat doing in the workplace? , 2002, CSCW '02.

[23]  Bonnie A. Nardi,et al.  Interaction and outeraction: instant messaging in action , 2000, CSCW '00.

[24]  V. Smith,et al.  Preferences, Property Rights, and Anonymity in Bargaining Games , 1994 .