14.03.2017 Views

policymakers demonstrate

EwB_Final_WithCover

EwB_Final_WithCover

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

592 Barcellan, Bøegh Nielsen, Calsamiglia, Camerer, Cantillon et al.<br />

Akerlof’s 1982 theory of involuntary unemployment assumed that workers and<br />

firms are prone to exchange gifts, in which firms pay higher wages and workers<br />

repay the wage gift with high effort. In theory, this mechanism is used by firms<br />

to induce workers to provide reciprocal effort in situations otherwise characterized<br />

by moral hazard. This hypothesis was confirmed by many experiments<br />

(beginning with Fehr et al., 1993), which in turn led researchers to develop<br />

theories to explain reciprocity (e.g., Dufwenberg and Kirchsteiger, 2004) and<br />

to look for similar kinds of reciprocity in the field (see e.g., Falk, 2007). The<br />

interplay between the lab and field data can also go the other way. For example,<br />

the winner’s curse was first observed in field data on oil-lease bidding (Capen<br />

et al., 1971). It was then extensively analysed in lab experiments (summarized<br />

by Kagel and Levin, 2002).<br />

Lessons from Lab Experiments<br />

During the last 30 years, lab experiments have become well-established and<br />

central to economics research. This is reflected by the number of articles reporting<br />

experimental results that are published in economic journals. Between<br />

2006–2010, about 100 experimental papers were published in leading general<br />

journals (American Economic Review, Econometrica, Journal of Political<br />

Economy, Quarterly Journal of Economics, Review of Economic Studies, and<br />

Economic Journal), and more than 350 papers were published in specialized<br />

journals (such as Games and Economic Behavior, Journal of Economic Behavior<br />

and Organization, and Experimental Economics). 15<br />

While there are also some experimental studies in macroeconomics and<br />

political economy, the huge majority of the papers (about 95%) investigate four<br />

broadly defined fields: Individual decisions, social preferences, markets, and<br />

games. This reflects the close relation of lab experiments with (micro)economic<br />

theory. Most of the experimental findings are quite robust up to plausible variations<br />

of the experimental design. These robust findings include:<br />

Markets. In market experiments with induced supply and demand for a<br />

homogenous good, observed prices and quantities converge quickly to the market<br />

clearing equilibrium, in particular when trade is organized in a centralized<br />

manner (‘double auctions’). This result holds for very thin markets (even with<br />

only three traders on each market side), for a huge variety of different demand<br />

and supply conditions, for multiple connected markets operating at the same<br />

time, for different subject pools, etc. (for an overview see part 1 of Plott and<br />

Smith, 2008).<br />

Games. In many experimental games, the observed outcome coincides with the<br />

Nash equilibrium prediction. Systematic deviations from the Nash equilibrium<br />

prediction have induced the development of level-k and quantal response theory,<br />

which can (most of the time) explain the observed deviations from Nash.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!