We examine experimentally how Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) respond to incentives and how they provide incentives in situations requiring trust and trustworthiness. As a control we compare the behavior of CEOs with the behavior of students. We find that CEOs are consider-ably more trusting and exhibit more trustworthiness than students-thus reaching substantially higher efficiency levels than students. Moreover, we find that, for CEOs as well as for students, incentives based on explicit threats to penalize shirking backfire by inducing less trustworthy behavior-giving rise to hidden costs of incentives. However, the availability of penalizing incentives also creates hidden returns: if a principal expresses trust by voluntarily refraining from implementing the punishment threat, the agent exhibits significantly more trustworthiness than if the punishment threat is not available. Thus trust seems to reinforce trustworthy behav-ior. Overall, trustworthiness is highest if the threat to punish is available but not used, while it is lowest if the threat to punish is used. Paradoxically, however, most CEOs and students use the punishment threat, although CEOs use it significantly less.
We study indirect reciprocity and strategic reputation building in an experimental helping game. At any time only half of the subjects can build a reputation. This allows us to study both pure indirect reciprocity that is not contaminated by strategic reputation building and the impact of incentives for strategic reputation building on the helping rate. We find that while pure indirect reciprocity appears to be important, the helping choice seems to be influenced at least as much by strategic considerations. Strategic do better than non-strategic players and non-reciprocal do better than reciprocal players, casting doubt on previously proposed evolutionary explanations for indirect reciprocity.
In this paper, we suggest a novel approach to program evaluation that allows identification of the causal effect of a training program on the likelihood of being invited to a job interview under weak assumptions. The idea is to measure the program-effects by pre- and post-treatment data that are very close in time for the same individual. Our approach provides useful information on both, average effects of the program as well as information on the effects of the program for each individual. Evidence on individual treatment effects is helpful as it can be used to improve the targeting of programs.
The evidence from many experiments suggests that people are heterogeneous with regard to their abilities to make rational, forward looking, decisions. This raises the question when the rational types are decisive for aggregate outcomes and when the boundedly rational types shape aggregate results. We examine this question in the context of a long-standing and important economic problem - the adjustment of nominal prices after an anticipated money shock. Our experiments show that when agents' actions are strategic substitutes adjustment to the new equilibrium is extremely quick whereas under strategic complementarity adjustment lasts very long and is associated with relatively large real effects. This adjustment difference occurs because price expectations are very flexible under substitutability and very sticky under complementarity. Our results suggest that strategic complementarity does not only provide incentives for the rational types to partly mimic the behavior of the boundedly rational types butnit also renders people less rational and forward looking. In addition, underncomplementarity people attribute less rationality to the other players.
People not only care about outcomes, they also value the procedures which lead to the outcomes. Procedural utility is a potentially important source of human well-being. This paper aims at introducing the concept of procedural utility into economics, and argues that it should be incorporated more widely into economic theory and empirical research. Three building blocks of a concept of procedural utility are outlined and it is suggested how procedural utility can be fruitfully integrated. Evidence from a broad range of social sciences is reviewed in order to show that procedural utility is a relevant concept for economics.
This paper presents an application of evolutionary portfolio theory to stocks listed in the Swiss Market Index (SMI). We study numerically the long-run outcome of the competition of rebalancing rules for market shares in a stock market with actual dividends taken from firms listed in the SMI. Returns are endogenous because prices are determined by supply and demand stemming from the rebalancing rules. Our simulations show that in competition with rebalancing rules derived from Mean-Variance Optimization, Maximum Growth Theory and Behavioral Finance, the evolutionary portfolio rule discovered in Hens and Schenk-Hoppé (2001) will eventually hold total market wealth. According to this simple rule the portfolio weights should be proportional to the expected relative dividends of the assets.
People are likely to obtain utility not only from actual outcomes, but also from the conditions which lead to these outcomes. This paper empirically tests the notion of procedural utility for the context of work relationships. Using a large survey among British workers, we find substantial procedural effects on the utility workers derive from their pay. Utility from pay is not only strongly influenced by economic outcomes (the pay levels workers get for given inputs), but also by the way pay is determined. The findings are robust to a series of alternative explanations.
Does individual well-being depend on the absolute level of income and consumption or is it relative to one's aspirations? In a direct empirical test, it is found that higher income aspirations reduce people's utility, ceteris paribus. Individual data on reported satisfaction with life are used as a proxy measure for utility, and income evaluation measures are applied as proxies for people's aspiration levels. Consistent with processes of adaptation and social comparison, income aspirations increase with people's income as well as with the average income in the community they live in.
"This note shows that permanent fluctuations in the Cobweb model — though inconsistent with a rational expectations equilibrium — can be justified as being rational when reinterpreting the model in the theory of rational beliefs."
This work gives a brief overview of the portfolio selection problem following the mean-risk approach first proposed by Markowitz (1952). We consider various risk measures, i.e. variance, value-at-risk and expected-shortfall and we study the efficient frontiers obtained by solving the portfolio selection problem under these measures. We show that under the assumption that returns are normally distributed, the efficient frontiers obtained by taking value-at-risk or expected-shortfall are subsets of the mean-variance efficient frontier. We generalize this result for all risk measures that can be written as a particular combination of mean and variance and we show that for these measures Tobin separation holds under some restrictions.
