What's in a Name? Anonymity and Social Distance in Dictator and Ultimatum Games

By Gary Charness, Uri Gneezy. 2008

632 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management Science and Operations Research, Safety Research, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6ffb189b565fd0e4974778c3b453af64dd9f6901

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Management Science and Operations Research

In Safety Research

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Social value orientation moderates the effects of intuition versus reflection on responses to unfair ultimatum offers (2017, background): “…& Fischbacher, 2003; cultural variations, Henrich et al., 2001), sociological (e.g., gender differences, Solnick, 2001; social distance effects, Charness & Gneezy, 2008), and individual (e.g., relations to personality, Brandstätter & Königstein, 2001; effects of mental disorders, Koenigs &…”
Dictator games: a meta study (2011, background): “…Cárdenas, Candelo et al. 2008; Cárdenas and Carpenter 2008; Carlsson, He et al. 2008; Carpenter, Connolly et al. 2008; Castillo and Cross 2008; Charness and Gneezy 2008; Cox, Sadiraj et al. 2008; Farina, O'Higgins et al. 2008; Gurven, Zanolini et al. 2008; Koch and Normann 2008; Korenok,…”
Friends of Victims: Personal Experience and Prosocial Behavior (2008, background): “Other identifying factors, such as showing a victim's face or being in the presence of a victim, also increase prosocial behavior (Bohnet and Frey 1999; Charness and Gneezy 2006).”
Gender Differences in Altruism: Expectations, Actual Behaviour and Accuracy of Beliefs (2016, neutral): “ nothing. For this reason, dictators’ donations are taken as a measure of individual’s altruism, or inequity aversion (Fehr and Schmidt (1999); Bolton and Ockenfels (2000); Brañas-Garza (2006, 2007); Charness and Gneezy (2008)). 2.2 Protocol In our experiment, subjects were randomly divided between ”
Cyberbullying Via Social Media (2015, background): “Due to social distance and reduced identifiability online (Charness & Gneezy, 2008), it was expected that cyberbullying directed toward people known only online would be seen most frequently, and viewed as the least negative, whereas cyberbullying toward peers would be seen least frequently and…”
Do people care about social context? Framing effects in dictator games (2012, neutral): “Bohnet and Frey (1999) find that dictators give more when they can see the recipient; similarly Charness and Gneezy (2008) show that gifts go up when the dictator learns the recipient’s surname.”
Money, depletion, and prosociality in the dictator game (2015, background): “Consequently, dictator giving is strongly reduced if the perception of anonymity is increased (Hoffman, McCabe, Shachat, & Smith, 1994; Charness & Gneezy, 2008; Franzen & Pointner, 2012).”
The impact of buyer–seller relationships and reference prices on the effectiveness of the pay what you want pricing mechanism (2013, neutral): “…researchers have found that subjects behaved less selfishly as they varied the degree of social distance between the subject and experimenter as well as between the subjects (Andreoni and Bernheim 2009; Hoffman et al. 1994; Hoffman et al. 1996; Bohnet and Frey 1999a; Charness and Gneezy 2008).”
How the Grapevine Keeps You in Line (2011, neutral): “…shown that identifiability, or the fact that others know about one’s contribution, can influence actual contributions (e.g., Andreoni & Petrie, 2004; Charness & Gneezy, 2008; Hoffman, McCabe, Shachat, & Smith, 1994; Hoffman, McCabe, & Smith, 1996; Nowak & Sigmund, 1998; Panchanathan & Boyd, 2004).”
Poverty in dictator games: Awakening solidarity (2003, background): “Moreover, in Charness & Gneezy [6], subjects were told the name of their recipients.”
More than Thirty Years of Ultimatum Bargaining Experiments: Motives, Variations, and a Survey of the Recent Literature (2013, neutral): “Chen and Tang (2009) compare ultimatum bargaining behavior of Tibetans and ethnic Han Chinese and find that Tibetans are more likely to accept offers than their Han Chinese counterparts. Ferraro and Cummings (2007) run ultimatum game experiments with Hispanics and Navajo subjects in the US and find ”
The donor is in the details (2013, neutral): “…given the opportunity to share any portion of that money with a fellow student, were more generous when they were informed of the would-be recipient's name, hometown, major, and hobbies than when they were not given this personal information (Bohnet & Frey, 1999; see also Charness & Gneezy, 2008).”
Gender selection discrimination: Evidence from a Trust game (2010, background): “We agree with Dufwenberg and Muren’s concern that using names (e.g., see Bertrand and Mullainathon 2004, Charness and Gneezy 2004, Fershtman and Gneezy 2001 and Holm 2000) may convey additional information such as ethnicity and/or cultural identity.”