Universität Leipzig, Institut für Soziologie, Beethovenstraße 15, 04107 Leipzig, Germany.
Soc Sci Res. 2012 Mar;41(2):372-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2011.09.009. Epub 2011 Oct 5.
While preference-based explanations play an increasing role in economics and sociology, the accurate measurement of social preferences deserves more attention. Most laboratory experiments measure social preferences by studying the division of "a cake that nobody had to bake" (Güth and Kliemt, 2003). This article reports results of the first ultimatum game experiment with bargaining over waiting time. The experiment was created to avoid effects of windfall gains. In contrast to donated money, time is not endowed by the experimenter and implies a natural loss to subjects. This allows for a better measurement of the inherent conflict in the ultimatum game. We implemented three anonymity conditions; one baseline condition, one condition with anonymity among subjects and one double-blind condition in which the experimenter did not know the division of waiting time. While we expected to observe less other-regarding behavior in ultimatum game bargaining over time, our experimental results rather confirm previous ultimatum game experiments, in which people bargained over money. The modal offer was half of the waiting time and only one offer was rejected. Interestingly, anonymity did not change the results significantly. In conclusion, our experiment confirms other-regarding behavior in the ultimatum game.
虽然基于偏好的解释在经济学和社会学中发挥着越来越重要的作用,但社会偏好的准确衡量仍需要更多关注。大多数实验室实验通过研究“没有人必须烘焙的蛋糕”的分配来衡量社会偏好(Güth 和 Kliemt,2003)。本文报告了第一个与等待时间讨价还价的最后通牒博弈实验的结果。该实验旨在避免意外之财的影响。与捐赠的钱不同,时间不是由实验者赋予的,这意味着主体自然会有损失。这使得在最后通牒博弈中更好地衡量内在冲突。我们实施了三种匿名条件;一个基线条件、一个主体之间匿名的条件和一个实验者不知道等待时间分配的双盲条件。虽然我们预计在时间讨价还价的最后通牒博弈中会观察到较少的他人关注行为,但我们的实验结果与以前的金钱讨价还价的最后通牒博弈实验相吻合,在这些实验中,人们对等待时间进行了讨价还价。模态报价是等待时间的一半,只有一个报价被拒绝。有趣的是,匿名并没有显著改变结果。总之,我们的实验证实了最后通牒博弈中的他人关注行为。