Cited by 2,416Experimental Behavioral Economics StudiesEvolutionary Game Theory and CooperationGame Theory and Voting Systems

A theory of reciprocity.

Falk, Armin, Fischbacher, Urs·2006·Games and Economic Behavior

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.geb.2005.03.001

Cites

56 of 56 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Falk, A., & Fischbacher, U.
Affiliations
  • University of Bonn (DE)
  • University of Zurich (CH)
Corresponding author
Fischbacher, Urs
Venue
Games and Economic Behavior
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-02
Volume
54
Issue
2
Pages
293-315
ISSN
0899-8256 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3122520279
Cited by
2,416
References
56
Citations by year
2026: 73 · 2025: 93 · 2024: 97 · 2023: 104 · 2022: 90 · 2021: 121 · 2020: 120 · 2019: 138 · 2018: 135 · 2017: 120 · 2016: 111 · 2015: 132 · 2014: 138 · 2013: 133 · 2012: 129
FWCI
251.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Games and Economic Behavior (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Evolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Game Theory and Voting Systems
Keywords
reciprocity, fairness, intention, punishment, reward, ultimatum game, gift-exchange game, dictator game, prisoner's dilemma, public goods game, competitive markets, bilateral interaction

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