WHY DO PEOPLE KEEP THEIR PROMISES? AN EXPERIMENTAL TEST OF TWO EXPLANATIONS

By Christoph Vanberg. 2008

467 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Demography, General Decision Sciences, Safety Research

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a82df2063392b9fee66fa5fd791c2c123903d5a5

How researchers see this paper

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

In Demography

1. Gary Charness
2. Urs Fischbacher
3. E. Spiegelman
4. Franziska Heusi
5. Raúl López-Pérez
6. John H. Kagel
7. Collin Raymond
8. Navin Kartik

In General Decision Sciences

1. Gary Charness
2. Johannes Abeler
3. David J. Cooper
4. Daniele Nosenzo
5. Collin Raymond
6. John H. Kagel
7. Urs Fischbacher
8. E. Spiegelman

In Safety Research

1. Gary Charness
2. Johannes Abeler
3. Ernst Fehr
4. David J. Cooper
5. Urs Fischbacher
6. John H. Kagel
7. Daniele Nosenzo
8. Collin Raymond

Citations in the corpus

• Other Regarding Preferences: A Selective Survey of Experimental Results (2012, background): “Rather than testing any particular theory of other-regarding preferences, AM focus on whether choices are consistent 29 See Vanberg (2008), Ellingsen, Johannesson, Tjøtta, and Torsvik (2010) and Reuben, Sapienza, and Zingales (2009).”
• Preferences for Truth‐Telling (2016, background): “Other influential experiments in this literature are, e.g., Ellingsen and Johannesson (2004) and Vanberg (2008).”
• Bare promises: An experiment (2010, methodology): “However, based on data from a clever design, Vanberg (2008) calls CD's conclusions to question to some degree.”
• Honesty on the Streets. A Field Study on Newspaper Purchasing (2013, background): “On the other hand, Vanberg (2008) reports results that suggest people have also internalized a norm for promise keeping per se.”
• Would I lie to you? On social preferences and lying aversion (2009, background): “Building on Charness and Dufwenberg (2006), Charness and Dufwenberg (2007) and Vanberg (2008) study whether promises are kept because promisers value keeping their promises per se (similar to lying aversion), or because of expectations-based guilt aversion.”
• Lies in Disguise. An experimental study on cheating (2013, background): “Kartik (2009) assumes that people have a preference for promise-keeping or truth-telling per se, which is supported by experiments by Sánchez-Pagés and Vorsatz (2007) and Vanberg (2008).”
• Why do people tell the truth? Experimental evidence for pure lie aversion (2013, result): “Our study contributes to a burgeoning experimental literature examining deception and honesty—e.g., Gneezy (2005), Charness and Dufwenberg (2006), Vanberg (2008), Hurkens and Kartik (2009), Sutter (2009).”
• Nudging in education (2018, background): “Simply stating the intent to enrol could provide a goal-setting mechanism and at the same time serves as a way to make a promise to enrol which applicants might feel uncomfortable breaking (Charness & Dufwenberg, 2006; Vanberg, 2008).”