Disclosure of belief–dependent preferences in a trust game

Abstract Experimental evidence suggests that agents in social dilemmas have belief-dependent, other-regarding preferences. But in experimental games such preferences cannot be common knowledge, because subjects play with anonymous co-players. We address this issue theoretically and experimentally in the context of a Trust Game, assuming that the trustee’s choice may be affected by a combination of guilt aversion and intention-based reciprocity. We recover trustees’ belief-dependent preferences from their answers to a structured questionnaire. In the main treatment, the answers are disclosed and made common knowledge within each matched pair, while in the control treatment there is no disclosure. Our main auxiliary assumption is that such disclosure approximately implements a psychological game with complete information. To organize the data, we classify subjects according to their elicited preferences, and test predictions for the two treatments using both rationalizability and equilibrium. We find that, while preferences are heterogeneous, guilt aversion is the prevalent psychological motivation, and that behavior and elicited beliefs move in the direction predicted by the theory.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Economic Theory
Published
2025-04-07
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00199-025-01645-5
Citations
23
Primary Topic
Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.73

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Disclosure of belief–dependent preferences in a trust game

Pierpaolo Battigalli, Rosemarie Nagel, Giuseppe Attanasi, Elena Manzoni
23 citations
Economic Theory
Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
4.73
article

Disclosure of belief–dependent preferences in a trust game

Pierpaolo Battigalli, Rosemarie Nagel, Giuseppe Attanasi, Elena Manzoni
article en
23 citations

Abstract

Abstract Experimental evidence suggests that agents in social dilemmas have belief-dependent, other-regarding preferences. But in experimental games such preferences cannot be common knowledge, because subjects play with anonymous co-players. We address this issue theoretically and experimentally in the context of a Trust Game, assuming that the trustee’s choice may be affected by a combination of guilt aversion and intention-based reciprocity. We recover trustees’ belief-dependent preferences from their answers to a structured questionnaire. In the main treatment, the answers are disclosed and made common knowledge within each matched pair, while in the control treatment there is no disclosure. Our main auxiliary assumption is that such disclosure approximately implements a psychological game with complete information. To organize the data, we classify subjects according to their elicited preferences, and test predictions for the two treatments using both rationalizability and equilibrium. We find that, while preferences are heterogeneous, guilt aversion is the prevalent psychological motivation, and that behavior and elicited beliefs move in the direction predicted by the theory.

Economic TheoryVol. 81(1-2)
University of Bergamo (IT), Corvinus University of Budapest (HU), Universitat Pompeu Fabra (ES), Barcelona School of Economics (ES), Bocconi University (IT), Sapienza University of Rome (IT)
Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades, Università degli studi di Bergamo, European Commission, Agence Nationale de la Recherche, Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca, Université de Strasbourg, European Research Council
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
4.73
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.