期刊文献+

群体活动中“榜样的力量”是无穷的吗——来自一项动态公共品博弈实验的证据 被引量:2

Is the Power of Example Infinite in Group Actions——Evidence from a Dynamic Public Goods Experiment
原文传递
导出
摘要 群体活动中我们会重视榜样人物的示范带头作用。本文在经典的公共品自愿捐献实验中加入了榜样先行机制,构造一个动态公共品博弈的实验模型,研究先行者的"榜样"行为对公共品捐献绩效的影响问题。与多数研究成果类似,本文的研究表明,有先行者的榜样作用相比于无先行者的情况,对公共品捐献有显著促进作用;且在先行者选择上,轮流担任和投票选举先行者带来的捐献效果要明显优于随机产生先行者的情况。但我们的研究还表明,个体社会偏好的异质性也对公共品捐献绩效影响显著:条件合作者和驼峰型偏好者的捐献绩效优于搭便车者,但民主选举产生先行者的方式有助于纠正搭便车者的投机倾向。 In the study of group actions, we attach importance to the exemplary role of the model leader. In this paper, we add leading mechanism to the classic public goods experiment framework, focusing on the impact of the exemplary role of the leader on the performance of public goods contribution. Similar to most research results, our study shows that: compared to the case without leadership, the existing of leaders significantly improved the public goods contribution performance; and as for the mechanisms to select a leader, taking turns and election produce significantly more public goods contribution than randomly generating the leader. Moreover, our study also shows that the heterogeneity of personal social preference has a significant influence on public goods contribution results. Conditional cooperators and subjects with "hump-shaped" preference contribute more than free riders, while the democratic election mechanism to determine the leader helps to weaken the free riders' speculation.
出处 《财贸经济》 CSSCI 北大核心 2017年第12期80-94,共15页 Finance & Trade Economics
关键词 社会偏好 领导机制 公共品自愿捐献 实验经济学 Social Preference, Leading Mechanism,Voluntary Contribution of Public Goods, Experimental Economics
  • 相关文献

参考文献7

二级参考文献168

  • 1夏纪军.中国的信任结构及其决定——基于一组实验的分析[J].财经研究,2005,31(6):39-51. 被引量:31
  • 2余向荣.公共政策评估的社会实验方法:理论综述[J].经济评论,2006(2):73-79. 被引量:13
  • 3魏光兴.公平偏好的博弈实验及理论模型研究综述[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2006,23(8):152-160. 被引量:33
  • 4陈叶烽,叶航.2008:《基于相关实验的社会偏好理论:一个综述》,浙江大学社会科学跨学科中心工作论文.
  • 5Andreoni, J., 1995, " Warm-Glow versus Cold-Prickle the Effects of Positive and Negative Framing on Cooperation in Experiments", Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110( 1 ), pp. 1-21.
  • 6Andreonl, J. and Miller, J., 2002, "Giving According to GARP: An Experimental Test of the Consistency of Preferences for Ahruism", Econometrica, 70(2), pp. 737 753.
  • 7Ashley, R., Ball, S. and Eckel, C., 2009, "Motives for Giving: A Reanalysis of Two Classic Public Goods Experiments", CBEES working paper, School of Economic, Political and Policy Sciences, University of Texas at Dallas.
  • 8Ashraf, N., Bohnet, I. and Piankov, N., 2006, "Decomposing Trust and Trustworthiness", Experimental Economics, 9, pp. 193-208.
  • 9Berg, J., Dickaut, J. and McCabe, K., 1995, "Trust, Reciprocity and Social History", Glmes and Economic Behavior, 10.
  • 10Bohon, G.E. and Ockenfels, A., 2000, "ERC-A Theory of Equity, Reciprocity, and Competition", American Economic Review, 90(1).

共引文献174

同被引文献25

引证文献2

二级引证文献2

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部