Cited by 75Experimental Behavioral Economics StudiesGame Theory and Voting SystemsEconomic Theory and Institutions

The choice of institutions to solve cooperation problems: a survey of experimental research

Open access
Dannenberg, Astrid, Gallier, Carlo·2020·Experimental Economics

Abstract

A growing experimental literature studies the endogenous choice of institutions to solve cooperation problems arising in prisoners’ dilemmas, public goods games, and common pool resource games. Participants in these experiments have the opportunity to influence the rules of the game before they play the game. In this paper, we review the experimental literature of the last 20 years on the choice of institutions and describe what has been learned about the quality and the determinants of institutional choice. Cooperative subjects and subjects with optimistic beliefs about others often vote in favor of the institution. Almost all institutions improve cooperation if they are implemented, but they are not always implemented by the players. Institutional costs, remaining free-riding incentives, and a lack of learning opportunities are identified as the most important barriers. Unresolved cooperation problems, like global climate change, are often characterized by these barriers. The experimental results also show that cooperation tends to be higher under endogenously chosen institutions than exogenously imposed institutions. However, a significant share of players fails to implement the institution and they often perform poorly, which is why we cannot conclude that letting people choose is better than enforcing institutions from outside.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10683-019-09629-8

Cites

78 of 78 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Dannenberg, A. (2015). Nonbinding agreements in public goods experiments. Oxford Economic Papers, 68(1), 279-300.
  2. Gross, J., Médez, Z., Okamoto-Barth, S., & Riedl, A. (2016). Building the Leviathan-Voluntary cen- tralization of punishment power sustains cooperation in humans. Scientific Reports, 6(1), 1-7.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dannenberg, A., & Gallier, C.
Affiliations
  • University of Kassel (DE)
  • Centre for European Economic Research (DE)
Corresponding author
Dannenberg, Astrid
Venue
Experimental Economics
Published
2020-09
Volume
23
Issue
3
Pages
716-749
ISSN
  • 1386-4157 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-6938
OpenAlex
W2972894591
Cited by
75
References
77
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4
FWCI
11.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Experimental Economics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Open Research (University of Surrey) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
H2020 European Research Council (636746)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Game Theory and Voting Systems
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Economic Theory and Institutions
Keywords
cooperation, prisoner's dilemma, public goods game, common-pool resources, free-riding, institutional expenditures, optimism bias, climate change cooperation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review