Deterministic vs. Stochastic Altruism
SSRN Electronic Journal
2022
- 243Usage
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
We report experimental evidence from a 3-person Dictator Game in which dictators decide over the distribution of probabilities of winning a fixed, indivisible, monetary prize. This evidence is compared with (i) a control treatment in which money is perfectly divisible and dictators allocate shares of the prize across the group members, and with (ii) a novel "hybrid" protocol by which a fraction of the prize is allocated deterministically, and the remainder by way of a lottery. Dictators' decisions are framed within a (suitably modified version of) Saito (2013)'s model of distributional justice, also controlling for (own payoff) risk aversion. This allows us to disentangle -both structurally and experimentally- motives for equality of opportunity from motives for equality of outcomes. Our structural estimates suggest that the former have a greater impact on subjects' distributional choices (favoring altruism in the stochastic frame), while subjects' revealed risk aversion lowers the opportunity cost of giving (favoring altruism in the deterministic frame). In our data, those conflicting effects cancel each other, yielding a non significant difference in giving between the stochastic and deterministic treatment.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know