Hostname: page-component-7b9c58cd5d-v2ckm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-17T06:24:26.162Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An Application of the English Clock Market Mechanism to Public Goods Games

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2025

M. Vittoria Levati  and
Tibor Neugebauer
M. Vittoria Levati*
Affiliation:
Max Planck Institute for Research into Economic Systems, Strategic Interaction Group, Kahlaische Strasse 10, D-07745 Jena, Germany
Tibor Neugebauer*
Affiliation:
Finanzmarkttheorie, Universität Hannover, Königsworther Platz 1, D-30167 Hannover, Germany
*
email: levati@mpiew-jena.mpg.de
email: T.Neugebauer@mbox.vwl.uni-hannover.de
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper reports an experimental study of the public goods game in which contributions are not submitted all at once but incrementally as coordinated in real time by a clock. Individuals press a button as soon as the clock equals their willingness to contribute. By providing information about the point at which subjects stop further contributions we find evidence for conditionally cooperative behaviour: A subject's decision to stop contributing induces an immediate reaction of the other group members.

Keywords

real time public goodsvoluntary contributionsconditional cooperation

JEL classification

H41: Public Goods D44: Auctions C92: Laboratory, Group Behavior C72: Noncooperative Games
Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Economics , Volume 7 , Issue 2 , June 2004 , pp. 153 - 169
Copyright
Copyright © 2004 Economic Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Andreoni, J. (1995). “Cooperation in Public Goods Experiments: Kindness or Confusion?” American Economic Review. 85(4), 891–904.Google Scholar
Bolton, G.E. and Ockenfels, A. (2000). “ERC: A Theory of Equity, Reciprocity, and Competition.” American Economic Review. 90(1), 166–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandts, J. and Schram, A. (2001). “Cooperation and Noise in Public Goods Experiments: Applying the Contribution Function Approach.” Journal of Public Economics. 79(2), 399–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Croson, R. (1998). “Theories of Commitment, Altruism and Reciprocity: Evidence from Linear Public Goods Games.” OPIM Working Paper. Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Croson, R. (forthcoming). “Feedback in Voluntary Contribution Mechanisms: An Experiment in Team Production.” Research in Experimental Economics.Google Scholar
Darlington, R.B. (1975). Radicals and Squares: Statistical Methods for the Behavioral Sciences. NY: Logan Hill Press.Google Scholar
Davis, D.D. and Holt, C.A. (1993). Experimental Economics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dorsey, R.E. (1992). “The Voluntary Contributions Mechanism with Real Time Revisions.” Public Choice. 73, 261–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fatás, E., Neugebauer, T., and Perote, J. (2003). “Profit Sharing, Free-Riding and Minimum Effort Incentives in Partnerships: An Experimental Study.” Working Paper 41/03, LINEEX, University of Valencia.Google Scholar
Fehr, E. and Gächter, S. (2000). “Fairness and Retaliation: The Economics of Reciprocity.” Journal of Economic Perspectives. 14(3), 159–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fehr, E. and Schmidt, K. (1999). “Fairness, Competition, and Inequlity.” Quarterly Journal of Economics. 114(3), 817–868.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischbacher, U. (1999). “z-Tree—Zurich Toolbox for Readymade Economic Experiments.” Working Paper No. 21, University of Zurich.Google Scholar
Fischbacher, U., Gächter, S., and Fehr, E. (2001). “Are People Conditionally Cooperative? Evidence from a Public Goods Experiment.” Economics Letters. 71(3), 397–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kagel, J.H. (1995). “Auctions: A Survey of Experimental Research.” In Kagel, J. and Roth, A.E. (eds.), Handbook of Experimental Economics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keser, C. and van Winden, F. (2000). “Conditional Cooperation and Voluntary Contributions to Public Goods.” Scandinavian Journal of Economics. 102, 23–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kurzban, R., McCabe, K., Smith, V.L., and Wilson, B.J. (2001). “Incremental Commitment and Reciprocity in a Real Time Public Goods Game.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 27(12), 1662–1673.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ledyard, J.O. (1995). “Public Goods: A Survey of Experimental Research.” In Kagel, J. and Roth, A.E. (eds.), Handbook of Experimental Economics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Loewenstein, G.F., Thompson, L., and Bazerman, M.H. (1989). “Social Utility and Decision Making in Interpersonal Contexts.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 57(3), 426–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palfrey, T. and Prisbey, J. (1997). “Anomalous Behavior in Public Goods Experiments: How Much and Why.” American Economic Review. 87(5), 829–846.Google Scholar
Rabin, M. (1993). “Incorporating Fairness into Economics and Game Theory.” American Economic Review. 83(5), 1281–1302.Google Scholar
Rawls, J. (1972). A Theory of Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Samuelson, P. (1954). “The Pure Theory of Public Expenditures.” Review of Economics and Statistics. 36, 387–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sonnemans, J., Schram, A., and Offerman, T. (1999). “Strategic Behavior in Public Good Games: When Partners Drift Apart.” Economics Letters. 62, 35–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sugden, R. (1984). “Reciprocity: The Supply of Public Goods through Voluntary Contributions.” Economic Journal. 94, 772–787.CrossRefGoogle Scholar