nach oben

Social Choice and Welfare

Erschienen in:

22.05.2017 | Original Paper

Consumer or citizen? Prosocial behaviors in markets and non-markets

verfasst von: Mia Reinholt Fosgaard, Toke Reinholt Fosgaard, Nicolai Juul Foss

Erschienen in: Social Choice and Welfare | Ausgabe 2/2017

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

While much prosocial behavior has traditionally taken place in non-market contexts, such as families, clans, and social associations, it is in increasingly brought into the market context. For example, companies increasingly promote their products and services by engaging in charitable giving and policy makers increasingly push for the implementation of market-driven prosocial initiatives. However, this trend has occurred without being informed by evidence on how the market influences individuals’ engagement in prosocial behavior. Using a public goods game that simulates a market and a non-market context, we analyze prosocial behavior and its psychological underpinnings across these two contexts. First, we find that prosocial behavior occurs at lower levels in markets than non-markets. Second, we find that individuals’ beliefs about prosocial norms are more important for prosocial behavior in markets than non-markets, while the opposite is true for their autonomous motivation towards prosocial behavior. This suggests that decision-makers need to adjust the means to foster prosocial behavior, depending on the institutional context deemed appropriate for specific prosocial behaviors.

Nächster Artikel Impossibilities for probabilistic assignment

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

It should be emphasized that the influence of framings effect is not always clear. Previous work on framing the public good game as the community game has for instance both been identified as a positive and negative influence on cooperation (Dufwenberg et al. 2011; Liberman et al. 2004).

Autonomous motivation is the type of motivation which is driven by the individual’s personal values and interests (Deci and Ryan 2000).

This conjecture echoes previous research on public good games which identifies context sensitivity in belief. For example, Dufwenberg et al. (2011) find that beliefs are differently linked to behavior in the public good game under different frames (give vs. take, neutral vs. community).

Notice that we assume no technological advantages of letting the sellers provide the public good, as suggested by Kotchen (2006). Rather, we assume that the seller only faces cost when selling and has a linear cost scheme in line with the model suggested by Besley and Ghatak (2007).

In practice, close to all players’ decisions in the market treatment faced the same marginal cost of contribution as those in the non-market treatment. The median mark-up (sellers’ price-cost) in the market treatment is zero and the mean mark-up is 0.14 suggesting that a positive mark-ups was an extremely limited phenomenon. See more in the result section.

Aarts H, Dijksterhuis A (2003) The silence of the library: environment, situational norm, and social behavior. J Pers Soc Psychol 84(1):18–28CrossRef

Aarts H, Dijksterhuis A, Custers R (2003) Automatic normative behavior in environments: the moderating role of conformity in activating situational norms. Soc Cogn 21:447–464CrossRef

Andreoni J (1995) Warm-glow versus cold-prickle: the effects of positive and negative framing on cooperation in experiments. Q J Econ 110(1):1–21CrossRef

Arora N, Henderson T (2007) Embedded premium promotion: why it works and how to make it more effective. Mark Sci 26(4):514–531CrossRef

Besley T, Ghatak M (2007) Retailing public goods: the economics of corporate social responsibility. J Public Econ 91(9):1645–1663CrossRef

Bowles S (1998) Endogenous preferences: the cultural consequences of markets other economic institutions. J Econ Lit 36(1):75–111

Bowles S (2008) Policies designed for self-interested citizens may undermine “the moral sentiments”: evidence from economic experiments. Science (New York NY) 320(5883):1605–1609CrossRef

Davis DD, Holt CA (1993) Experimental economics (Princeton). Princeton University Press, Princeton

Deci EL, Ryan RM (1985) Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Plenum Press, New YorkCrossRef

Deci EL, Ryan RM (2000) The “What” and “Why” of goal pursuits: human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychol Inq 11(4):227–268CrossRef

Deck C, Kimbrough EO (2013) Do market incentives crowd out charitable giving? J Socio-Econ 47:16–24CrossRef

DellaVigna S (2010) Consumers who care. Science (New York NY) 5989:287–288CrossRef

Devinney TM (2009) Is the socially responsible corporation a myth? the good, the bad, and the ugly of corporate social responsibility. Acad Manag Perspect 23(2):44–56CrossRef

Dufwenberg M, Gächter S, Hennig-Schmidt H (2011) The framing of games and the psychology of play. Games Econ Behav 73(2):459–478CrossRef

Falk A, Szech N (2013) Morals and markets. Science (New York NY) 340(6133):707–711CrossRef

Fehr E, Falk A (2002) Psychological foundations of incentives. Eur Econ Rev 46(95):687–724CrossRef

Fischbacher U (2007) Z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments. Exp Econ 10(2):171–178CrossRef

Fischbacher U, Gächter S (2010) Social preferences, beliefs, and the dynamics of free riding in public goods experiments. Am Econ Rev 100(1):541–556CrossRef

Fosgaard TR, Gårn Hansen L, Wengström E (2017) Framing and misperceptions in public good experiment. Scand J Econ 119(2):435–456CrossRef

Fosgaard TR, Hansen LG, Wengström E (2014) Understanding the nature of cooperation variability. J Public Econ 120:134–143CrossRef

Frey BS, Jegen R (2001) Motivation crowding theory. J Econ Surv 15(5):589–611CrossRef

Frey BS, Meier S (2004) Pro-social behavior in a natural setting. J Econ Behav Organ 54(1):65–88CrossRef

Ghosh S, Shankar K (2013) Red, white and pink: linking public good contributions to private good sales. J Econ Behav Organ 88:96–108CrossRef

Gneezy A, Gneezy U, Nelson LD, Brown A (2010) Shared social responsibility: a field experiment in pay-what-you-want pricing and charitable giving. Science (New York NY) 329(5989):325–327CrossRef

Gneezy A, Gneezy U, Riener G, Nelson LD (2012) Pay-what-you-want, identity, and self-signaling in markets. Proc Natl Acad Sci 109(19):7236–7240CrossRef

Grant AM (2008) Does intrinsic motivation fuel the prosocial fire? Motivational synergy in predicting persistence, performance, and productivity. J Appl Psychol 93(1):48–58CrossRef

Grant A, Dutton J (2012) Beneficiary or Benefactor: are people more prosocial when they reflect on receiving or giving? Psychol Sci 23(9):1033–1039CrossRef

Greiner B (2015) Subject pool recruitment procedures: organizing experiments with ORSEE. J Econ Sci Assoc 1(1):114–125CrossRef

Hoeffler S, Keller KL (2002) Building brand equity through corporate societal marketing. J Public Policy Mark 21(1):78–89CrossRef

Isaac RM, Mathieu D, Zajac EE (1991) Institutional framing and perceptions of fairness. Const Polit Econ 2(3):329–370CrossRef

Kelley HH, Stahelski AJ (1970) Social interaction basis of cooperators’ and competitors’ beliefs about others. J Pers Soc Psychol 16(1):66–91CrossRef

Kocher MG, Martinsson P, Matzat D, Wollbrant C (2015) The role of beliefs, trust and risk preferences in contributions to a public good. J Econ Psychol 51:236–244CrossRef

Kotchen MJ (2006) Green markets and private provision of public goods. J Polit Econ 114(4):816–834CrossRef

Krishna A, Rajan U (2009) Cause marketing: spillover effects of cause-related products in a product portfolio. Manage Sci 55(9):1469–1485CrossRef

Ledyard J (1995) Public goods: a survey of experimental research. In: Kagel AE, Roth JH (eds) The handbook of experimental economics. Princeton Unicersity Press, Princeton, pp 111–194

Liberman V, Samuels SM, Ross L (2004) The name of the game: predictive power of reputations versus situational labels in determining prisoner’s dilemma game moves. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 30(9):1175–1185CrossRef

Lichtenstein DR, Drumwright ME, Braig BM (2004) The effect of corporate social responsibility on customer donations to corporate-supported nonprofits. J Mark 68(4):16–32CrossRef

Macoveanu J, Ramsøy TZ, Skov M, Siebner HR, Fosgaard TR (2016) The neural bases of framing effects in social dilemmas. Neurosci Psychol Econ 9(1):14–28CrossRef

Mazar N, Zhong C-B (2010) Do green products make us better people? Psychol Sci J Am Psychol Soc/APS 21(4):494–498CrossRef

Mohr LA, Webb DJ (2005) The effects of corporate social responsibility and price on consumer responses. J Consum Aff 39(1):121–147CrossRef

North DC (1990) Institutions, institutional change and economic performance, vol 104. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRef

Ottone S, Ponzano F (2010) Competition and cooperation in markets. The experimental case of a winner-take-all setting. J Socio Econ 39(2):163–170CrossRef

Porter ME, Kramer MR (2002) The competitive advantage of corporate philanthropy. Harv Bus Rev 80(12):56–68

Ryan RM (1995) Psychological needs and the facilitation of integrative processes. J Pers 63(3):397–427CrossRef

Ryan RM, Connell JP (1989) Perceived locus of causality and internalization: examining reasons for acting in two domains. J Pers Soc Psychol 57(5):749–761CrossRef

Sandel MJ (2013) Market reasoning as moral reasoning: why economists should re-engage with political philosophy. J Econ Perspect 27(4):121–140CrossRef

Servaes H, Tamayo A (2013) The impact of corporate social responsibility on firm value: the role of customer awareness. Manag Sci 59(5):1045–1061CrossRef

Vohs KD, Mead NL, Goode MR (2006) The psychological consequences of money. Science (New York NY) 314(5802):1154–1156CrossRef

Weinstein N, Ryan RM (2010) When helping helps: autonomous motivation for prosocial behavior and its influence on well-being for the helper and recipient. J Pers Soc Psychol 98(2):222–244CrossRef

Zelmer J (2003) Linear public goods experiments: a meta-analysis. Exp Econ 6(3):299–310CrossRef

Titel: Consumer or citizen? Prosocial behaviors in markets and non-markets
verfasst von: Mia Reinholt Fosgaard
Toke Reinholt Fosgaard
Nicolai Juul Foss
Publikationsdatum: 22.05.2017
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: Social Choice and Welfare / Ausgabe 2/2017
Print ISSN: 0176-1714
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-217X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-017-1058-4

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2017

Minimum incoming cost rules for arborescences

Overthrowing the dictator: a game-theoretic approach to revolutions and media

Impossibilities for probabilistic assignment

Giving to poverty relief charities: the impact of beliefs and misperceptions toward income redistribution in a real donation experiment

The likelihood of a Condorcet winner in the logrolling setting

Bribe-proofness for single-peaked preferences: characterizations and maximality-of-domains results