Outcomes versus intentions: On the nature of fair behavior and its development with age
By Matthias Sutter. 2007
189 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Demography, Safety Research
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3ef6659ff292d9b42cefb19839f00ddbfeeebed3
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Cognitive Neuroscience
- Stefan T. Trautmann
- Benedikt Herrmann
- Simon Gächter
- Matthias Sutter
- Daniela Glätzle-Rützler
- Ernst Fehr
- Ananish Chaudhuri
- Nikos Nikiforakis
In Demography
- Stefan T. Trautmann
- Simon Gächter
- Matthias Sutter
- Benedikt Herrmann
- Daniela Glätzle-Rützler
- C. Zoller
- Ernst Fehr
- Martin G. Kocher
In Safety Research
- Benedikt Herrmann
- Stefan T. Trautmann
- Matthias Sutter
- Simon Gächter
- Daniela Glätzle-Rützler
- C. Zoller
- Ernst Fehr
- Martin G. Kocher
Citations in the corpus
- Economic behavior of children and adolescents – A first survey of experimental economics results (2019, background): “Sutter (2007) also reports no age effects in his study of mini-ultimatum games with 7-15 year-olds.”
- More than Thirty Years of Ultimatum Bargaining Experiments: Motives, Variations, and a Survey of the Recent Literature (2013, unknown): “The results from ultimatum games played by children and teenagers are somehow mixed, however (see Murnighan and Saxon, 1998; Hoffmann and Tee, 2006; Sutter, 2006; Steinbeis et al., 2012).”
- The limits of self-governance when cooperators get punished: Experimental evidence from urban and rural Russia (2011, background): “(e.g., List (2004); Holm and Nystedt (2005); Bellemare and Kroger (2007); Sutter (2007) ;”
- A tractable model of process fairness under risk (2009, methodology): “This game has been studied empirically, and the behavioral pattern observed in the literature is compared to the theoretical predictions of the process model, and also to the predictions of the outcome model and to those of intention-based reciprocity models (Cox, Friedman, & Gjerstad, 2006; Dufwenb”