liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
Refine search result
1 - 3 of 3
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Rows per page
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sort
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
Select
The maximal number of hits you can export is 250. When you want to export more records please use the Create feeds function.
  • 1.
    Gärtner, Manja
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. German Inst Econ Res DIW Berlin, Germany.
    The prosociality of intuitive decisions depends on the status quo2018In: Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, ISSN 2214-8043, E-ISSN 2214-8051, Vol. 74, p. 127-138Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Previous research came to contradictory conclusion about the prosocial nature of intuitive decisions, as compared to deliberate decisions. This paper proposes the prosociality of the status quo allocation as a determinant of the prosociality of intuitive decisions. I present results from two experiments (N = 1,649) that manipulate time pressure and elicit response times in a binary dictator game. One of the choices is prosocial while the other is pro-self. The status quo option is varied to be equal to the prosocial allocation in one treatment and the selfish allocation in a second treatment. In a third treatment, there is no status quo allocation. Time pressure is found to increase selfishness in treatments without a status quo and has no effect on choices in treatments with a status quo. However, the status quo systematically affects response times. Prosocial choices are made significantly faster than selfish choices under a prosocial status quo and selfish choices are made significantly faster than prosocial choices under a selfish status quo.

  • 2.
    Gärtner, Manja
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Möllerstrom, Johanna
    Humboldt University, Germany; Research Institute Ind Econ IFN, Sweden.
    Seim, David
    Research Institute Ind Econ IFN, Sweden; Stockholm University, Sweden.
    Individual risk preferences and the demand for redistribution2017In: Journal of Public Economics, ISSN 0047-2727, E-ISSN 1879-2316, Vol. 153, p. 49-55Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Redistributive policies can provide an insurance against future negative economic shocks. This, in turn, implies that an individuals demand for redistribution is expected to increase with her risk aversion. To test this prediction, we elicit risk aversion and demand for redistribution through a well-established set of measures in a representative sample of the Swedish population. We document a statistically significant and robust positive relation between risk aversion and the demand for redistribution that is also economically important. We show that previously used proxies for risk aversion (such as being an entrepreneur or having a history of unemployment) do not capture the effect of our measure of risk aversion but have distinctly different effects on the demand for redistribution. We also show evidence indicating that risk aversion can explain significant parts of the well-studied relations between age and gender on the one hand and demand for redistribution on the other. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

  • 3.
    Gärtner, Manja
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Economics. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Sandberg, Anna
    Stockholm University, Sweden.
    Is there an omission effect in prosocial behavior? A laboratory experiment on passive vs. active generosity2017In: PLoS ONE, ISSN 1932-6203, E-ISSN 1932-6203, Vol. 12, no 3, article id e0172496Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    We investigate whether individuals are more prone to act selfishly if they can passively allow for an outcome to be implemented (omission) rather than having to make an active choice (commission). In most settings, active and passive choice alternatives differ in terms of factors such as the presence of a suggested option, costs of taking an action, and awareness. We isolate the omission effect from confounding factors in three experiments, and find no evidence that the distinction between active and passive choices has an independent effect on the propensity to implement selfish outcomes. This suggests that increased selfishness through omission, as observed in various economic choice situations, is driven by other factors than a preference for selfish omissions.

1 - 3 of 3
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf