The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Choosing the Carrot or the Stick? Endogenous Institutional Choice in Social Dilemma Situations
Open accessAbstract
We analyse an experimental public goods game in which group members can endogenously determine whether they want to supplement a standard voluntary contribution mechanism with the possibility of rewarding or punishing other group members. We find a significantly positive effect of endogenous institutional choice on the level of cooperation in comparison to the same exogenously implemented institutions. This suggests that participation rights enhance cooperation in groups. With endogenous choice, groups typically vote for the reward option, although punishment is even more effective in sustaining high levels of cooperation. Our results are evaluated against the predictions of social preference models.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Altruistic punishment in humans
Fehr, E., & Gächter, S. (2002) · Nature · doi:10.1038/415137a · Cited by 5,616
Cooperation and Punishment in Public Goods Experiments
Fehr, E., & Gächter, S. (2000) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.90.4.980 · Cited by 4,547 · cited 5×
“Like Fehr and Gächter (2000), we also observe a positive, but relatively small number of low contributors that punish high contributors.”
BackgroundInfluentialUnderstanding Social Preferences with Simple Tests
Charness, G., & Rabin, M. (2002) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/003355302760193904 · Cited by 3,970
Are people conditionally cooperative? Evidence from a public goods experiment
Fischbacher, U., Gächter, S., & Fehr, E. (2001) · Economics Letters · doi:10.1016/s0165-1765(01)00394-9 · Cited by 2,780
Antisocial Punishment Across Societies
Herrmann, B., Thöni, C., & Gächter, S. (2008) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1153808 · Cited by 2,038
The Neural Basis of Altruistic Punishment
de Quervain, D. J.-F., Fischbacher, U., Treyer, V., Schellhammer, M., Schnyder, U., Buck, A., & Fehr, E. (2004) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1100735 · Cited by 1,768
Cited by
Social Preferences, Beliefs, and the Dynamics of Free Riding in Public Goods Experiments
Fischbacher, U., & Gächter, S. (2010) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.100.1.541 · Cited by 1,316
Rand, D. G., & Nowak, M. A. (2013) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2013.06.003 · Cited by 1,308
Punishment and counter-punishment in public good games: Can we really govern ourselves?
Nikiforakis, N. (2008) · Journal of Public Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jpubeco.2007.04.008 · Cited by 711
Reward, punishment, and cooperation: A meta-analysis.
Balliet, D., Mulder, L. B., & Van Lange, P. A. M. (2011) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0023489 · Cited by 720
Dynamic social networks promote cooperation in experiments with humans
Rand, D. G., Arbesman, S., & Christakis, N. A. (2011) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1108243108 · Cited by 653
Metadata
- Authors
- SUTTER, M., HAIGNER, S., & KOCHER, M. G.
- Venue
- Review of Economic Studies
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2010-08-13
- Volume
- 77
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1540-1566
- ISSN
- 0034-6527 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2100607774
- Cited by
- 542
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 96.82
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Choosing the Carrot or the Stick? Endogenous Institutional Choice in Social Dilemma Situations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1467-937x.2010.00608.x
- The paper
- SUTTER, M., HAIGNER, S., & KOCHER, M. G. (2010). Choosing the Carrot or the Stick? Endogenous Institutional Choice in Social Dilemma Situations. Review of Economic Studies. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-937x.2010.00608.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
