Cultural Differences in Ultimatum Game Experiments: Evidence from a Meta-Analysis

824 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

Preferences for Truth‐Telling (2016, background): “Since lower offers are rejected more readily, the actual gains forgone are lower than this share (Oosterbeek et al. 2004).”
Trust games: A meta-analysis (2011, background): “In this sense, our study most resembles those performed by Zelmer (2003) for the public goods game, Oosterbeek, Sloof, and Van de Kuilen (2004) for the ultimatum game, and Jones (2008) for the prisoner’s dilemma game.”
The dynamics of responder behavior in ultimatum games: a meta-study (2011, neutral): “This pattern is quite robust, occurring in a wide variety of cultures (e.g. Roth et al. 1991; Henrich et al. 2001; Oosterbek et al. 2004)3 and holding up under large increases in stakes (Slonim and Roth 1998; Cameron 1999).”
Dictator games: a meta study (2011, methodology): “For the size of positive contributions, conditional on giving anything, it uses OLS, adjusting the distribution assumption to the fact that observations are taken from a truncated normal distribution (for background see McDowell 2003 ).”