{"title":"Instinctiveness and reflexivity in behavioural type variability","authors":"Gianna Lotito , Matteo Migheli , Guido Ortona","doi":"10.1016/j.socec.2024.102322","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Experimental economics uses response times (RTs) to evaluate the instinctiveness of choices and behaviours. The experiment proposed in this paper seeks to provide further results about the correlation between RTs and behaviours. We use a repeated public goods game with random re-matching to study (1) the relationship between response times and the stability of individual behavioural types and (2) the relationship between RTs and contribution variability. We identify three behavioural types in a public goods game - free-riders, unconditional cooperators, and conditional cooperators. To define RTs in a round, we use two distinct measures: the time the subject takes to review the previous round's results and the time the subject takes to choose the contribution to the public good in that round. Experimental evidence suggests that longer RTs are linked to higher variability in both behavioural types and contributions in a public goods game. The results show that conditional cooperation is the most reflexive choice: 1) the time used to see the results of the previous round correlates positively with behavioural type variation; 2) the subjects switching from free-riding to conditional cooperation spend more time than the others also when choosing the amount of their contribution to the public good.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51637,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics","volume":"114 ","pages":"Article 102322"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214804324001599","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Experimental economics uses response times (RTs) to evaluate the instinctiveness of choices and behaviours. The experiment proposed in this paper seeks to provide further results about the correlation between RTs and behaviours. We use a repeated public goods game with random re-matching to study (1) the relationship between response times and the stability of individual behavioural types and (2) the relationship between RTs and contribution variability. We identify three behavioural types in a public goods game - free-riders, unconditional cooperators, and conditional cooperators. To define RTs in a round, we use two distinct measures: the time the subject takes to review the previous round's results and the time the subject takes to choose the contribution to the public good in that round. Experimental evidence suggests that longer RTs are linked to higher variability in both behavioural types and contributions in a public goods game. The results show that conditional cooperation is the most reflexive choice: 1) the time used to see the results of the previous round correlates positively with behavioural type variation; 2) the subjects switching from free-riding to conditional cooperation spend more time than the others also when choosing the amount of their contribution to the public good.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly the Journal of Socio-Economics) welcomes submissions that deal with various economic topics but also involve issues that are related to other social sciences, especially psychology, or use experimental methods of inquiry. Thus, contributions in behavioral economics, experimental economics, economic psychology, and judgment and decision making are especially welcome. The journal is open to different research methodologies, as long as they are relevant to the topic and employed rigorously. Possible methodologies include, for example, experiments, surveys, empirical work, theoretical models, meta-analyses, case studies, and simulation-based analyses. Literature reviews that integrate findings from many studies are also welcome, but they should synthesize the literature in a useful manner and provide substantial contribution beyond what the reader could get by simply reading the abstracts of the cited papers. In empirical work, it is important that the results are not only statistically significant but also economically significant. A high contribution-to-length ratio is expected from published articles and therefore papers should not be unnecessarily long, and short articles are welcome. Articles should be written in a manner that is intelligible to our generalist readership. Book reviews are generally solicited but occasionally unsolicited reviews will also be published. Contact the Book Review Editor for related inquiries.