posted on 2018-01-25, 16:14authored byBriony D. Pulford, Andrew M. Colman, Graham Loomes
In experimental games, task-related incentives are payments to experimental subjects that vary according to their strategy choices and the consequent outcomes of the games. Limited evidence exists regarding incentive magnitude effects in experimental games. We examined one-off strategy choices and self-reported reasons for choices in eight 3 × 3 and four 4 × 4 normal-form games under task-related incentives of conventional magnitude and compared them with choices and reasons in the same games under incentives five times as large. Both strategy choices and self-reported reasons for choices were almost indistinguishable between the two conditions. These results are in line with earlier findings on individual decision making and with a parametric model, in which the incentive elasticity of effort is very small when compared with other factors, such as the complexity of the decision problem.
Funding
We are grateful to the Economic and Social Research Council (Grant ES/K002201/1 to the
third author) and the Leicester Judgment and Decision Making Endowment Fund (Grant RM43G0176 to the first and second authors) for support in the preparation of this article. We also thank Diana G. Pinto and Felix Kölle for research assistance on this project.
History
Citation
Games, 2018, 9 (1), pp. 1-10 (10)
Author affiliation
/Organisation/COLLEGE OF LIFE SCIENCES/Biological Sciences/Neuroscience, Psychology and Behaviour