A Comparison of Punishment Rules in Repeated Public Good Games - An Experimental Study

Decker, Torsten, Stiehler, Andreas and Strobel, Martin (2002). A Comparison of Punishment Rules in Repeated Public Good Games - An Experimental Study. UNU-MERIT Research Memoranda. UNU-MERIT.

Document type:
Report
Collection:
UNU-MERIT Research memoranda

Metadata
Documents
Versions
Statistics
  • Attached Files (Some files may be inaccessible until you login with your UNU Collections credentials)
    Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads
    rm2002-018.pdf PDF application/pdf 448.99KB
  • Sub-type Working paper
    Author Decker, Torsten
    Stiehler, Andreas
    Strobel, Martin
    Title A Comparison of Punishment Rules in Repeated Public Good Games - An Experimental Study
    Series Title UNU-MERIT Research Memoranda
    Volume/Issue No. 18
    Publication Date 2002
    Place of Publication Maastricht, NL
    Publisher UNU-MERIT
    Pages 32
    Language eng
    Abstract In this experimental study we analyse three collective and one individual punishment rule in a public good setting. We show that under all punishment rules cooperation is stronger and more sustainable than reported from settings without punishment. Moreover, we present evidence and explanations for differences between the rules concerning punishment intensity, contribution and profit levels, as well as justice. Finally, we investigate influences crucial to participants' support for a collective rule when the individual rule is the status quo. We show that beside profit differences the degree of consent required by the collective rule is essential for the degree of support by the participants.
    Copyright Holder UNU-MERIT
    Copyright Year 2002
    Copyright type All rights reserved
  • Versions
    Version Filter Type
  • Citation counts
    Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
    Access Statistics: 653 Abstract Views, 185 File Downloads  -  Detailed Statistics
    Created: Fri, 13 Dec 2013, 12:42:21 JST