Evaluating Behavioral Incentive Compatibility: Insights from Experiments

Incentive compatibility is core to mechanism design. The success of auctions, matching algorithms, and voting systems all hinge on the ability to select incentives that make it in the individual’s interest to reveal their type. But how do we test whether a mechanism that is designed to be incentive compatible is actually so in practice, particularly when faced with boundedly rational agents with nonstandard preferences? We review the many experimental tests that have been designed to assess behavioral incentive compatibility, separating them into two categories: indirect tests that evaluate behavior within the mechanism, and direct tests that assess how participants respond to the mechanism’s incentives. Using belief elicitation as a running example, we show that the most popular elicitations are not behaviorally incentive compatible. In fact, the incentives used under these elicitations discourage rather than encourage truthful revelation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Journal of Economic Perspectives
Published
2024-11-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.38.4.131
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.10
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluating Behavioral Incentive Compatibility: Insights from Experiments

Alistair J. Wilson, Lise Vesterlund, David Danz
4 citations
The Journal of Economic Perspectives
Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
2.10
article

Evaluating Behavioral Incentive Compatibility: Insights from Experiments

Alistair J. Wilson, Lise Vesterlund, David Danz
article en
4 citations

Abstract

Incentive compatibility is core to mechanism design. The success of auctions, matching algorithms, and voting systems all hinge on the ability to select incentives that make it in the individual’s interest to reveal their type. But how do we test whether a mechanism that is designed to be incentive compatible is actually so in practice, particularly when faced with boundedly rational agents with nonstandard preferences? We review the many experimental tests that have been designed to assess behavioral incentive compatibility, separating them into two categories: indirect tests that evaluate behavior within the mechanism, and direct tests that assess how participants respond to the mechanism’s incentives. Using belief elicitation as a running example, we show that the most popular elicitations are not behaviorally incentive compatible. In fact, the incentives used under these elicitations discourage rather than encourage truthful revelation.

The Journal of Economic PerspectivesVol. 38(4)
National Bureau of Economic Research (US), University of Pittsburgh (US), Wilson College (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
2.10
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.

Evaluating Behavioral Incentive Compatibility: Insights from Experiments — Alistair J. Wilson, Lise Vesterlund, et al. · The Journal of Economic Perspectives (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS