Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/233652 
Year of Publication: 
2020
Citation: 
[Journal:] Business and Society Review [ISSN:] 1467-8594 [Volume:] 125 [Issue:] 4 [Publisher:] Wiley [Place:] Hoboken, NJ [Year:] 2020 [Pages:] 387-391
Publisher: 
Wiley, Hoboken, NJ
Abstract: 
Cohn et al. (2019) designed the field experiment about the lost wallets across 40 countries to examine whether people attempt to contact the owners to return the 17,000 wallets. We discussed the design flaw in their experimental settings by reanalyzing the relationship between the rates of wallet return, in the Cohn et al. (2019)’s data, and the percentage of the Internet penetration (over population) as an upper bound of proportion email users. We found that countries with limited access to email have a lower rate of wallets’ return after controlling other factors. Furthermore, we revisited the Abeler et al. (2019)’s aggregated data to study whether the dishonest behaviors in the laboratory could predict the actual honesty behavior or not. It turns out that what happens in the lab makes no sense to our reality. This comment contributes to the extant literature about an experimental designation for honesty studies.
Subjects: 
comment
experiment
honesty
Persistent Identifier of the first edition: 
Creative Commons License: 
cc-by Logo
Document Type: 
Article
Document Version: 
Published Version

Files in This Item:
File
Size





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.