Don’t patronize me! An experiment on preferences for authorship
Open accessAbstract
Do people only reject interference and keep control to affect the outcome? We find that 20% of subjects reject unrequired help and insist on their solution to a problem—although doing so is costly and does not change the result. We tease out the motives by varying the information available to the interfering party (paternalist). Subjects do not resist to show to the paternalist that they were able to find the correct solution. Instead, two motives seem to play a role. First, subjects prefer to have produced or “authored” the solution themselves. Second, subjects desire to signal their authorship and hence their independence to the paternalist.
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
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.
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?
When individuals are given the right of choice or autonomy, their intrinsic motivation increases.
“When individuals are given the right of choice or autonomy, their intrinsic motivation increases [52][53][54].”
From What Influences Users’ Intention to Share Works in Designer-Driven User-Generated Content Communities? A Study Based on Self-Determination Theory (2023) · cites this paper as [52]
Section 3.3 suggests that reclaiming authorship may restore meaning to a person's effort, and the Conclusion reports that subjects valued having a say even when it could not change the outcome. The paper does not show that giving people a choice or autonomy increases their intrinsic motivation; it studies resistance to interference and preference for authorship. (LLM, conf=0.83)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredWhen the three psychological needs are met, they can guide positive results in various areas of life.
“When they are met, they can guide positive results in various areas of life [52,53,58].”
From What Influences Users’ Intention to Share Works in Designer-Driven User-Generated Content Communities? A Study Based on Self-Determination Theory (2023) · cites this paper as [52]
Section 3.3 (page unavailable) says that being regarded as independent or competent may have beneficial effects in real life, such as greater discretion or more interesting tasks. It does not say that meeting three psychological needs leads to positive results across various areas of life. (LLM, conf=0.75)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
Maslow, A. H. (1943) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0054346 · Cited by 21,563 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Still, psychologists like Maslow (1943) claim that there is a fundamental need for the esteem of others and Andreoni and Bernheim (2009) provide evidence that even 6An authorship preference may also be argued on the basis that “help offered by others may be detrimental to one’s self-esteem and…”
BackgroundDietvorst, B. J., Simmons, J. P., & Massey, C. (2018) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.2016.2643 · Cited by 1,230 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 20
- Andreoni, J., & Bernheim, B. D. (2009). Social image and the 50-50 norm: A theoretical and experimental analysis of audience effects. Econometrica, 77(5), 1607-1636.
- Ariely, D., Kamenica, E., & Prelec, D. (2008). Man's search for meaning: The case of Legos. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 67(3-4), 671-677.
- Avey, J. B., Avolio, B. J., Crossley, C. D., & Luthans, F. (2009). Psychological ownership: Theoretical extensions, measurement and relation to work outcomes. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30(2), 173-191.
- Bartling, B., Fehr, E., & Herz, H. (2014). The intrinsic value of decision rights. Econometrica, 82(6), 2005-2039.
- Bénabou, R., & Tirole, J. (2003). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Review of Economic Studies, 70, 489-520.
- Bobadilla-Suarez, S., Sunstein, C. R., & Sharot, T. (2017). The intrinsic value of choice: The propensity to under-delegate in the face of potential gains and losses. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 54(3), 187-202.
- Charness, G., & Rabin, M. (2002). Understanding social preferences with simple tests. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117(3), 817-869.
- Deci, E. L. (1971). Effects of externally mediated rewards on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 18(1), 105-115.
- Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). The general causality orientations scale: Self-determination in personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 19(2), 109-134.
- Dufwenberg, M., & Kirchsteiger, G. (2004). A theory of sequential reciprocity. Games and Economic Behavior, 47(2), 268-298.
- Falk, A., & Fischbacher, U. (2006). A theory of reciprocity. Games and Economic Behavior, 54(2), 293-315.
- Fehr, E., & Schmidt, K. M. (1999). A theory of fairness, competition, and cooperation. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114(3), 817-868.
- Fehr, E., Schmidt, K. M., Herz, H., & Wilkening, T. (2013). The lure of authority: Motivation and incentive effects of power. American Economic Review, 103(4), 1325-59.
- Fischbacher, U. (2007). Zurich toolbox for research in economic experiments. Experimental Economics, 10(2), 171-178.
- Greiner, B. (2015). Subject pool recruitment procedures: Organizing experiments with ORSEE. Journal of the Economic Science Association, 1(1), 114-125.
- Lachapelle, P. (2008). A sense of ownership in community development: Understanding the potential for participation in community planning efforts. Community Development, 39(2), 52-59.
- Owens, D., Grossman, Z., & Fackler, R. (2014). The control premium: A preference for payoff autonomy. American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, 6(4), 138-161.
- Pierce, J. L., Kostova, T., & Dirks, K. T. (2001). Toward a theory of psychological ownership in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 26(2), 298-310.
- Rabin, M. (1993). Incorporating fairness into game theory and economics. American Economic Review, 83(5), 1281-1302.
- Sloof, R., & von Siemens, F. A. (2017). Illusion of control and the pursuit of authority. Experimental Economics, 20(3), 556-573.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Song, H., Wei, J., & Jiang, Q. (2023) · Systems · doi:10.3390/systems11110540 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
- Authors
- Lübbecke, S., & Schnedler, W.
- Affiliations
- Paderborn University (DE)
- IZA - Institute of Labor Economics (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Schnedler, Wendelin
- ORCID
- Schnedler, Wendelin
- Venue
- Journal of Economics & Management Strategy
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2020-04
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 420-438
- ISSN
- 1058-6407 (ISSN-L)
- 1530-9134
- OpenAlex
- W3015695397
- Cited by
- 8
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 0.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Economics & Management Strategy (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Econstor (Econstor) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- Johns Hopkins University
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Psychology of Social Influence
- Keywords
- paternalism, interference, authorship, signaling, independence, costly signaling, information asymmetry
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
