Hostname: page-component-5b777bbd6c-6lqsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-06-23T09:35:17.106Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Framing Effects in Public Goods Experiments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2025

R. Cookson
R. Cookson*
Affiliation:
London School of Economics, LSE Health, Houghton St., London WC2A 2AE, Great Britain
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Three effects of apparently superficial changes in presentation (“framing effects” in abroad sense), were replicated together in the same repeated linear public goods experiment with real financial incentives. First, 32 repetitions were presented as four phases of 8 repetitions with a break and results summary in between. Contribution levels decayed during each phase but then persistently returned to about 50% after each re-start. Second, subjects contributed more when the payoff function was decomposed in terms of a gift which is multiplied and distributed to the other players, rather than the equivalent public good from which everyone benefits. Third, subjects contributed more following a comprehension task which asks them to calculate the benefits to the group of various actions (the “We” frame), rather than the benefits to themselves (the “I” frame). These results suggest that aspects of presentation may have strong and replicable effects on experimental findings, even when care is taken to make the language and presentation of instructions as neutral as possible. Experimental economists should therefore give careful consideration to potential framing effects—or, better still, explicitly test for them—before making claims about the external validity of results.

Keywords

framing effectpublic goodexperimentmethodologyexternal validity

JEL classification

H41: Public Goods C92: Laboratory, Group Behavior
Type
Original Paper
Information
Experimental Economics , Volume 3 , Issue 1 , June 2000 , pp. 55 - 79
Copyright
Copyright © 2000 Economic Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Andreoni, J. (1988). “Why Free Ride? Strategies and Learning in Public Goods Experiments.” Journal of Public Economics. 37(3), 291–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andreoni, J. (1990). “Impure Altruism and Donations to Public Goods: A Theory of Warm-Glow Giving.” Economic Journal. 100, 464–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andreoni, J. (1995a). “Warm-Glow Versus Cold-Prickle: The Effects of Positive and Negative Framing on Cooperation in Experiments.” Quarterly Journal of Economics. CX(1), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andreoni, J. (1995b). “Cooperation in Public Goods Experiments: Kindness of Confusion?” American Economic Review. 84(4), 891–904.Google Scholar
Andreoni, J. and Miller, J.H. (1993). “Rational Cooperation in the Finitely Repeated Prisoner's Dilemma— Experimental Evidence.” Economic Journal. 103(418), 570–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arrow, K.J. (1988). “Behavior Under Uncertainty and Its Implications for Policy.” In Bell, D.E., Raiffa, H., and Tversky, A. (eds.), Decision Making: Descriptive, Normative and Prescriptive Interactions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 497–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Axelrod, R. (1984). The Evolution of Cooperation. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Bacharach, M.O.L. (1993). “Variable Universe Games.” In Binmore, K., Kirman, A., and Tani, P. (eds.), Frontiers of Game Theory. Cambridge MA: MIT Press, pp. 225–275.Google Scholar
Bacharach, M.O.L. (1997). “We Equilibria: A Variable Frame Theory of Cooperation.” Mimeo for Seminar on Cooperative Reasoning, Edinburgh 22 October 1997.Google Scholar
Bacharach, M. and Bernasconi, M. (1997). “The Variable-Frame Theory of Focal Points: An Experimental Study.” Games and Economic Behavior. 19, 1–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bateman, I., Munroe, A., Rhodes, B., Starmer, C., and Sugden, R. (1997a). “A Test of the Theory of Reference- Dependent Preferences.” Quarterly Journal of Economics. 112(2), 479–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bateman, I., Munroe, A., Rhodes, B., Starmer, C., and Sugden, R. (1997b). “Does Part-Whole Bias Exist? An Experimental Investigation.” Economic Journal. 107, 322–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brewer, M.B. and Kramer, R.M. (1986). “Choice Behavior in Social Dilemmas: Effects of Social Identity, Group Size and Decision Framing.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. L, 543–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burlando, R. and Hey, J. (1997). “Do Anglo-Saxons Free-Ride More?” Journal of Public Economics. 64, 41–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colman, A.M. (1995). Game Theory and Experimental Games, 2nd edn. Pergamon Press, Chap. five.Google Scholar
Croson, R.T.A. (1996). “Partners and Strangers Revisited.” Economics Letters. 53(1), 25–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawes, R.M. and Thaler, R. (1988). “Anomalies: Cooperation.” Journal of Economic Perspectives. 2(3), 187–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawes, R.M., van de Kragt, A.J.C., and Orbell, J.M. (1990). “Cooperation for the Benefit of Us—Not Me or My Conscience.” In Mansbridge, J. (ed.), Beyond Self-Interest. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 97–100.Google Scholar
Fleishman, . (1988). “The Effects of Decision Framing and Other's Behavior on Cooperation in a Social Dilemma.” Journal of Conflict Resolution. XXXII, 162–80.Google Scholar
Goetze, D. and Orbell, J.M. (1988). “Understanding and Cooperation in Social Dilemmas.” Public Choice. 57, 275–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Isaac, R.M., Walker, J.M., and Williams, A.W. (1994). “Group Size and the Voluntary Provision of Public Goods: Experimental Evidence Utilizing Large Groups.” Journal of Public Economics. 54(1), 1–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, D. and Knetsch, J.L. (1992). “Valuing Public Goods: The Purchase of Moral Satisfaction.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management. 22, 57–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. (1979). “Prospect Theory.” Econometrica. 47, 263–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knetsch, J.L. and Sinden, J.A. (1984). “Willingness to Pay and Compensation Demanded: Experimental Evidence of an Unexpected Disparity in Measures of Value.” Quarterly Journal of Economics. 99, 507–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knetsch, J.L., and Sinden, J.A. (1987). “The Persistence of Evaluation Disparities.” Quarterly Journal of Economics. 102, 691–695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kramer, R.M. and Brewer, M.B. (1984). “Effects of Group Identity on Resource Use in a Simulated Commons Dilemma.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 46, 1044–1057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kramer, R.M. and Brewer, M.B. (1986). “Social Group Identity and the Emergence of Cooperation in Resource Conservation Dilemmas.” In Wilke, H., Messick, D., and Rutte, C. (eds.), Experimental Resource Dilemmas. Frankfurt am Main: Verlag Peter Lang, pp. 203–234.Google Scholar
Kreps, D., Milgrom, P., Roberts, J., and Wilson, R. (1982). “Rational Cooperation in the Finitely Repeated Prisoners’ Dilemma.” Journal of Economic Theory. 27, 245–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ledyard, J. (1995). “Public Goods Experiments: A Review.” In Roth, A. and Kagel, J. (eds.), Handbook of Experimental Economics. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Machina, M.J. (1989). “Choice Under Uncertainty: Problems Solved and Unsolved.” In Hey, J. (ed.), Current Issues in Microeconomics.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nozick, R. (1993). The Nature of Rationality. Princeton New Jersey: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palfrey, TR. and Prisbrey, J.E. (1997). “Anomalous Behavior in Public Goods Experiments: How Much and Why?” American Economic Review. 87(5), 829.Google Scholar
Palfrey, T and Rosenthal, H. (1988). “Private Incentives in Social Dilemmas: The Effect of Incomplete Information and Altruism.” Journal of Public Economics. 35, 309–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rabin, M. (1993). “Incorporating Fairness into Game Theory and Econometrics.” American Economic Review. 83(5), 1281–1303.Google Scholar
Rutte, C.G., Wilke, H.A.M., and Messick, D.M. (1987). “The Effects of Framing Social Dilemmas as Give-Some or Take-Some Games.” British Journal of Social Psychology. XXVI, 103–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Selten, R. and Stoecker, R. (1986). “End Behavior in Sequences of Finite Prisoner's Dilemma Supergames: A Learning Theory Approach.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization. 7, 47–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shafir, E., Diamond, P, and Tversky, A. (1997). “Money Illusion.” Quarterly Journal of Economics. 112(2), 341–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sonnemans, J., Schram, A., and Offerman, T. (1998). “Public Good Provision and Public Bad Prevention: The Effect of Framing.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization. 34, 143–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sugden, R. (1984). “Reciprocity: The Supply of Public Goods Through Voluntary Contributions.” Economic Journal. 94, 777–787.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sugden, R. (1993). “Thinking as a Team: Towards an Explanation of Nonselfish Behavior.” In Altruism. Social Philosophy and Policy Foundation, USA, pp. 69–89.Google Scholar
Tversky, and Kahneman, (1981). “The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice.” Science. 211(4481), 453–458.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. (1991). “Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice—A Reference-Dependent Model.” Quarterly Journal of Economics. 106(4), 1039–1061.CrossRefGoogle Scholar