Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/59603 
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorSchubert, Manuelen
dc.date.accessioned2012-07-06-
dc.date.accessioned2012-07-11T14:40:31Z-
dc.date.available2012-07-11T14:40:31Z-
dc.date.issued2012-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10419/59603-
dc.description.abstractIntention-based models of reciprocity argue that people assess kindness by measuring the intended consequences of actual behavior (deeds) against foregone payoffs resulting from unchosen alternatives (omissions). While the effects of omissions have been intensively studied in recent years, less has been done with respect to the impact of deeds on reciprocation. I employ a novel game that alters the intended consequences behind actual behavior at constant levels of unchosen alternatives and realized payoffs. Aggregate results suggest that intended consequences only weakly matter for negative reciprocity. I find men to abstain from retaliation when others intend to mildly harm them. Women, however, seem to be largely invariant to intended consequences of actual behavior.en
dc.language.isoengen
dc.publisher|aUniversität Passau, Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakultät |cPassauen
dc.relation.ispartofseries|aPassauer Diskussionspapiere - Volkswirtschaftliche Reihe |xV-65-12en
dc.subject.jelD63en
dc.subject.jelC78en
dc.subject.jelC91en
dc.subject.ddc330en
dc.subject.keywordintentionsen
dc.subject.keywordreciprocityen
dc.subject.keywordkindnessen
dc.subject.keywordgenderen
dc.titleDeeds rather than omissions: How intended consequences provoke negative reciprocity-
dc.typeWorking Paperen
dc.identifier.ppn71905687Xen
dc.rightshttp://www.econstor.eu/dspace/Nutzungsbedingungenen
dc.identifier.repecRePEc:zbw:upadvr:V6512en

Files in This Item:
File
Size
190.33 kB





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