« Back to Results

Experimental Studies of Interdependent Preferences

Paper Session

Monday, Jan. 5, 2026 10:15 AM - 12:15 PM (EST)

Philadelphia Marriott Downtown, Room 412
Hosted By: Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics
  • Chair: Matthew G. Nagler, City College of New York

Who Benefits? An Experimental Analysis of Sucker Aversion in Charitable Giving

Sandra Goff
,
Bates College
Rachel Dentler
,
Skidmore College

Abstract

We use a within-subjects experimental design to examine whether people engage in excuse-driven behavior when there is a small probability that the beneficiary of a charitable act may be undeserving. Two choices calibrated to participants’ previously revealed risk preferences serve to identify the target behavior. In the first choice, Option A provides a certain payout to the participant while Option B is a lottery that pays out to either the participant (p = 0.99) or a luxurious country club located in a major metropolitan area (p = 0.01). If participants do not experience disutility from funds directed toward the country club, Option B should be preferred. In the second choice, the lottery in Option B instead benefits either a charity (p = 0.99) or the country club (p = 0.01), while Option A continues to provide a certain payout to the participant. Thirty-seven percent of participants choose Option B when the lottery benefits them but opt for Option A when the lottery benefits the charity, exhibiting excuse-driven behavior. An additional twenty percent of participants demonstrate a true aversion to contributing to the undeserving beneficiary by choosing Option A in both decisions and forgoing personal benefit to ensure that the country club does not receive a payoff. Supplemental questions and two follow-up studies test the robustness of our results and suggest that sucker aversion, an aversion to being, or being seen to be, naively cooperative, and excuse-driven sucker aversion may explain these results. This work contributes to the understanding of aversions and excuse-driven behavior and the sensitivity of charitable giving to contextual factors.

Opportunity as a Constraint on Prosocial Behavior

David Huffman
,
University of Pittsburgh
David Danz
,
University of Pittsburgh
Tymofiy Mylovanov
,
Kiev School of Economics

Abstract

We study how altruistic behavior depends on whether disadvantaged individuals have costly opportunities to help themselves. In incentivized experiments, we hold effort and outcomes constant while varying whether recipients can exert additional effort to improve their situation. We find that altruistic giving—and refraining from taking—is significantly reduced when recipients have such opportunities. The effect is strongest among individuals who endorse a norm of self-reliance. Our findings highlight a “hidden cost of opportunity”: interventions that expand opportunities may crowd out altruism, reducing welfare for the disadvantaged. The results shed light on fairness views and social norms underlying support for redistribution.

Pluralism Breeds Tolerance

Eugen Dimant
,
University of Pennsylvania and CESifo
Folco Panizza
,
IMT School of Advanced Studies Lucca
Erik O. Kimbrough
,
Chapman University
Alexander Vostroknutov
,
Maastricht University

Abstract

This study introduces the Norm-Drawing Task (NDT), a novel approach to measure pluralism, or the coexistence of multiple normative beliefs in a given context. By combining established methods, we uncover coexisting yet conflicting normative beliefs in well-known economic games, challenging the typical assumption of a single prevailing norm. Moreover, we are able to link norm multiplicity to actual behavior. In a well-powered and pre-registered experiment, we observe that participants who perceive multiple norms are more tolerant and punish norm violations less frequently and less severely than those who perceive a singular norm. In a second experiment, we show that this effect is causal. Comparing two elicitation protocols that allow participants to report multiple norms versus requiring them to report a single norm, we find that punishment is lower in the former than in the latter: pluralism breeds tolerance. The implications of our study are broad, indicating that societal structures and policy decisions could be influenced by the underlying multiplicity of norms. Moreover, the Norm-Drawing Task, for which we provide a ready-made software implementation, offers a new avenue for exploring important societal issues like the perception of minority groups and the dynamics of polarization.

Does Altruism Eliminate Market Anomalies?

Matthew G. Nagler
,
City College of New York
Ben Ho
,
Vassar College

Abstract

Using random assignment in an online laboratory setting to different orderings
of a charitable donation solicitation and elicitation of subjects’ WTA or WTP for
an unrelated good, we examine whether altruistic behavior reduces the endowment
effect. We use social norming and framing sub-treatments to stimulate giving exogenously, observing the effect on a subsequent WTA/WTP elicitation for treated
subjects. We find that giving shrinks the endowment effect. We observe increased
susceptibility to our main treatment for subjects who demonstrate an untreated
higher propensity to give, suggesting the presence of an underlying trait that renders people more capable of setting aside ownership-contingent valuation. The
results provide an explanation for the survival of altruism in market contexts and
offer insights for devising new policy solutions to address public goods problems.

Discussant(s)
Laura Razzolini
,
University of Alabama
Sandra Goff
,
Bates College
Catherine Eckel
,
Texas A&M University
Chloe Tergiman
,
Pennsylvania State University
JEL Classifications
  • C9 - Design of Experiments
  • D9 - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics