From the lab to the field: envelopes, dictators and manners

Aguiar, F., Brañas-Garza, P., Cobo-Reyes, R., Jimenez, N., & Miller, L. (2009). Are women expected to be more generous? Experimental Economics, 12(1), 93–98. Anderson, J., Burks, S., Carpenter, J., Götte, L., Maurer, K., Nosenzo, D., Potter, R., Rocha, K., & Rustichini, A. (2010). Self selection does not increase other-regarding preferences among adult laboratory subjects, but student subjects may be more self-regarding than adults. IZA Discussion Paper, 5389. Andreoni, J. (2006). Philanthropy (Vol. 2, Chap. 18, pp. 1201–1269). Amsterdam: Elsevier. Andreoni, J., & Bernheim, B. (2009). Social image and the 50–50 norm: a theoretical and experimental analysis of audience effects. Econometrica, 77, 1607–1636. Andreoni, J., & Miller, J. (2002). Giving according to GARP: an experimental test of the consistency of preferences for altruism. Econometrica, 70, 737–753. Andreoni, J., & Vesterlund, L. (2001). Which is the fair sex? Gender differences in altruism. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116(1), 293–312. Bandiera, O., Barankay, I., & Rasul, I. (2005). Social preferences and the response to incentives: evidence from personnel data. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 120(3), 917–962. Barmettler, F., Fehr, E., & Zehnder, C. (2012). Big experimenter is watching you! Anonymity and prosocial behavior in the laboratory. Games and Economic Behavior, 75(1), 17–34. Bellemare, C., & Kröger, S. (2007). On representative social capital. European Economic Review, 51, 183–202. Benz, M., & Meier, S. (2008). Do people behave in experiments as in real life? Evidence from donations. Experimental Economics, 11(3), 268–281. Buchan, N., Johnson, E., & Croson, R. (2006). Let’s get personal: an international examination of the influence of communication, culture, and social distance on other regarding preferences. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 60, 373–398. Cadsby, B., Servátka, M., & Song, F. (2010). Gender and generosity: does degree of anonymity or group gender composition matter? Experimental Economics, 13(3), 299–308. Camerer, C. (2011). The promise and success of lab-field generalizability in experimental economics: a critical reply to Levitt and List. Working Paper. Camerer, C., & Thaler, R. (1995). Anomalies: ultimatums, dictators and manners. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9(2), 209–219. Carpenter, J., & Myers, C. (2010). Why volunteer? Evidence on the role of altruism, image, and incentives. Journal of Public Economics, 94(11), 911–920. CBS (2010). Bevolking op 1 januari. Centraal Bureau voor de Statisktiek. Charness, G., Haruvy, E., & Sonsino, D. (2007). Social distance and reciprocity: an Internet experiment. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 63, 88–103. Charness, G., & Rabin, M. (2002). Understanding social preferences with simple tests. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117(3), 817–869. Cherry, T., Frykblom, P., & Shogren, J. (2002). Hardnose the dictator. The American Economic Review, 92(4), 1218–1221. Cleave, B., Nikiforakis, N., & Slonim, R. (2011). Is there selection bias in laboratory experiments? IZA Discussion Paper, 5488. Dana, J., Cain, D., & Dawes, R. (2006). What you don’t know won’t hurtme: costly (but quiet) exit in dictator games. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 100, 193–201. Dana, J., Weber, R., & Kuang, J. (2007). Exploiting moral wiggle room: experiments demonstrating an illusory preference for fairness. Economic Theory, 33, 67–80. Eckel, C., & Grossman, P. (2001). Chivalry and solidarity in ultimatum games. Economic Inquiry, 39(2), 171–188. Engel, C. (2011). Dictator games: a meta study. Experimental Economics, 14(4), 583–610. Etang, A., Fielding, D., & Knowles, S. (2011). Does trust extend beyond the village? Experimental trust and social distance in Cameroon. Experimental Economics, 14(1), 15–35. Fahr, R., & Irlenbusch, B. (2000). Fairness as a constraint on trust in reciprocity: earned property rights in a reciprocal exchange experiment. Economics Letters, 66, 275–282. Falk, A., & Heckman, J. (2009). Lab experiments are a major source of knowledge in the social sciences. Science, 326, 535–538. Falk, A., & Zehnder, C. (2007). Discrimination and in-group favoritism in a citywide trust experiment. IZA Discussion Paper, 2765. Falk, A., Meier, S., & Zehnder, C. (2012). Did we overestimate he role of social preferences? The case of self-selected student samples. Journal of the European Economic Association, forthcoming. Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 1. Fehr, E., & Schmidt, K. (1999). A theory of fairness, competition and cooperation. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114, 817–868. Forsythe, R., Horowitz, J., Savin, N., & Sefton, M. (1994). Fairness in simple bargaining experiments. Games and Economic Behavior, 6, 347–369. Franzen, A., & Pointner, S. (2012). The external validity of giving in the dictator game: a field experiment using the misdirected letter technique. Experimental Economics. doi:10.1007/s10683-012-9337-5. Harrison, G., & List, J. (2004). Field experiments. Journal of Economic Literature, XLII, 1009–1055. Henrich, J., Boyd, R., Bowles, S., Camerer, C., Fehr, E., & Gintis, H. (2004). Foundations of human sociality: economic experiments and ethnographic evidence from fifteen small-scale societies. New York: Oxford University Press. Herrmann, B., Thöni, C., & Gächter, S. (2008). Antisocial punishment across societies. Science, 319, 1362–1367. Hoffman, E., McCabe, K., & Smith, V. (1996). Social distance and other-regarding behavior in dictator games. The American Economic Review, 86(3), 653–660. Howitt, D., & McCabe, J. (1978). Attitudes do predict behaviour—in mails at least. British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 17, 285–286. Howitt, D., Craven, G., Iveson, C., Kremer, J., McCabe, J., & Rolph, T. (1977). The misdirected letter. British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 16, 285–286. Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J., & Thaler, R. (1986). Fairness as a constraint on profit seeking: entitlements in the market. The American Economic Review, 76(4), 728–741. Kessler, J., & Vesterlund, L. (2011). External validity of laboratory experiments. London: Oxford University Press. Kremer, J., Barry, R., & McNally, A. (1986). The misdirected letter and the quasi-questionnaire: unobtrusive measures of prejudice in Northern Ireland. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 16(4), 303–309. Lazear, E., Malmendier, U., & Weber, R. (2012). Sorting in experiments with application to social preferences. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 4(1), 136–163. Levitt, S., & List, J. (2007a). Viewpoint: on the generalizability of lab behaviour to the field. Canadian Journal of Economics, 40, 347–370. Levitt, S., & List, J. (2007b). What do laboratory experiments measuring social preferences reveal about the real world? The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21(2), 153–174. Levitt, S., & List, J. (2008). Homo economicus evolves. Science, 319(5865), 909–910. List, J. (2006a). The behavioralist meets the market: measuring social preferences and reputation effects in actual transactions. Journal of Political Economy, 114(1), 1–37. List, J. (2006b). Field experiments: a bridge between lab and naturally occurring data. Advances in Economic Analysis & Policy, 6(2), 1–45. List, J. (2009). Social preferences: some thoughts from the field. Annual Review of Economics, 1, 563–579. Oxoby, R., & Spraggon, J. (2008). Mine and yours: property rights in dictator games. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 65, 703–713. Winking, J., & Mizer, N. (2013). Natural-field dictator game shows no altruistic giving. Evolution and Human Behavior. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2013.04.002. Zizzo, D. (2010). Experimenter demand effects in economic experiments. Experimental Economics, 13(1), 75–98.