What Do Laboratory Experiments Tell Us About the Real World

By Steven D. Levitt, John A. List. 2006

246 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9a1c0ce77251806215bbd9d4869c976607e3190b

How researchers see this paper

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

Citations in the corpus

On the Norms of Charitable Giving in Islam: A Field Experiment (2012, methodology): ““O you who believe! Do not render vain your charity by reminders of your generosity or by injury, like him who spends his wealth to be seen of men and he does not believe in Allah nor in the last Day.”1 Although a similar prescription exists in the Christian Bible2, this prescription recent literatu”
Do Auctions Induce a Winner's Curse? New Evidence from the Corporate Takeover Market (2008, background): “Summary and conclusion As succinctly stated by Levitt and List (2006, p. 32), “The Winner’s Curse represents a disequilibrium behavior in which bidders systematically overbid and thus earn a negative payoff upon winning.” Possibly due to the persuasive arguments by Roll (1986), an article cited more”
On the Linkage between Financial Risk Tolerance and Risk Aversion: Evidence from a Psychometrically-Validated Survey versus an Online Lottery Choice Experiment (2006, unknown): “25 For a survey of this literature, see Harrison (2006). observed may also affect subject behavior (see Harrison and List, 2004; Levitt and List, 2006, especially pp. 15-18).”
The effects of externalities and framing on bribery in a petty corruption experiment (2009, background): “9 Note that in AIR’ and AHS’s experiments the SMME involved no bribery because trust was a prerequisite to offering a bribe. In Cameron et al (2005) the SMME involved the maximum possible bribe because the value of the corrupt service increased proportionately with the bribe offered.”
Love & Loans: The Effect of Beauty and Personal Characteristics in Credit Markets (2012, unknown): “The findings complement each other (see Levitt and List, 2006, for a discussion of strength and weaknesses of lab experiments).”
Measuring, explaining, and controlling tax evasion: lessons from theory, experiments, and field studies (2012, background): “Put differently, there are legitimate concerns about the “external validity” of experimental studies of tax compliance ( Levitt and List 2007 ); that is, do the results in the laboratory apply more broadly to the “naturally occurring world”? Of course, this is an issue that every data-driven study m”
Tax morale affects tax compliance : evidence from surveys and an artefactual field experiment (2009, background): “The cautions of List and Levitt (2007) must be borne in mind here.”
Subject pool effects in a corruption experiment: A comparison of Indonesian public servants and Indonesian students (2009, background): “Levitt and List (2006) argue that moral concerns are greater when an individual’s actions are more closely scrutinized and that the unnatural level of scrutiny in an experimental lab can bias the results away from what would be observed in the real world.”
A controlled field experiment on corruption (2011, background): “In particular, Levitt and List (2007) argue that, because they know they are being observed,”
What Do Laboratory Experiments Measuring Social Preferences Reveal About the Real World (2007, methodology): “When List (2006) approached a number of sports-card sellers about participating in the laboratory experiment described earlier, some sellers declined his invitation.”
The behavioural economics of climate change (2008, background): “( Levitt and List, in press ), there is much evidence from the field suggesting that people’s”