The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Field Experiments
Open accessAbstract
Experimental economists are leaving the reservation. They are recruiting subjects in the field rather than in the classroom, using field goods rather than induced valuations, and using field context rather than abstract terminology in instructions. We argue that there is something methodologically fundamental behind this trend. Field experiments differ from laboratory experiments in many ways. Although it is tempting to view field experiments as simply less controlled variants of laboratory experiments, we argue that to do so would be to seriously mischaracterize them. What passes for “control” in laboratory experiments might in fact be precisely the opposite if it is artificial to the subject or context of the task. We propose six factors that can be used to determine the field context of an experiment: the nature of the subject pool, the nature of the information that the subjects bring to the task, the nature of the commodity, the nature of the task or trading rules applied, the nature of the stakes, and the environment that subjects operate in.
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
Trust, Reciprocity, and Social History
Berg, J., Dickhaut, J., & McCabe, K. (1995) · Games and Economic Behavior · doi:10.1006/game.1995.1027 · Cited by 5,548
Angrist, J. D., & Krueger, A. B. (2001) · Journal of Economic Perspectives · doi:10.1257/jep.15.4.69 · Cited by 2,355
Functional imaging of neural responses to expectancy and experience of monetary gains and losses
Breiter, H. C., Aharon, I., Kahneman, D., Dale, A., & Shizgal, P. (2001) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/s0896-6273(01)00303-8 · Cited by 1,404
Altruism in Anonymous Dictator Games.
Eckel, C. C., & Grossman, P. J. (1996) · Games and Economic Behavior · doi:10.1006/game.1996.0081 · Cited by 1,126
List, J. A., & Lucking‐Reiley, D. (2002) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/324392 · Cited by 535
Self-citationList, J. A. (2001) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.91.5.1498 · Cited by 451
Self-citation
Cited by
What Do Laboratory Experiments Measuring Social Preferences Reveal About the Real World?
Levitt, S. D., & List, J. A. (2007) · Journal of Economic Perspectives · doi:10.1257/jep.21.2.153 · Cited by 2,668
Self-citationAngrist, J. D., & Krueger, A. B. (2001) · Journal of Economic Perspectives · doi:10.1257/jep.15.4.69 · Cited by 2,355
The value of reputation on eBay: A controlled experiment
Resnick, P., Zeckhauser, R., Swanson, J., & Lockwood, K. (2006) · Experimental Economics · doi:10.1007/s10683-006-4309-2 · Cited by 1,118
Eliciting Risk and Time Preferences
Andersen, S., Harrison, G. W., Lau, M. I., & Rutström, E. E. (2008) · Econometrica · doi:10.1111/j.1468-0262.2008.00848.x · Cited by 984
Self-citationOn the Interpretation of Giving in Dictator Games
List, J. A. (2007) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/519249 · Cited by 918
Self-citationA survey of experimental research on contests, all-pay auctions and tournaments
Dechenaux, E., Kovenock, D., & Sheremeta, R. M. (2015) · Experimental Economics · doi:10.1007/s10683-014-9421-0 · Cited by 706
‘Nudging’ hotel guests to reduce food waste as a win–win environmental measure
Kallbekken, S., & Sælen, H. (2013) · Economics Letters · doi:10.1016/j.econlet.2013.03.019 · Cited by 529
Experimental research on labor market discrimination
Neumark, D. (2018) · Journal of Economic Literature · doi:10.1257/jel.20161309 · Cited by 529
Does Price Matter in Charitable Giving? Evidence from a Large-Scale Natural Field Experiment
Karlan, D., & List, J. A. (2007) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.97.5.1774 · Cited by 519
Self-citationEthnic Discrimination in Germany’s Labour Market: A Field Experiment
Kaas, L., & Manger, C. (2012) · German Economic Review · doi:10.1111/j.1468-0475.2011.00538.x · Cited by 509
(2014) · Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) · Cited by 464
A review of experiments in tourism and hospitality
(2020) · doi:10.1016/j.annals.2020.102858 · Cited by 455
Site Selection Bias in Program Evaluation *
Allcott, H. (2015) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1093/qje/qjv015 · Cited by 426
Do people behave in experiments as in the field?—evidence from donations
Benz, M., & Meier, S. (2008) · Experimental Economics · doi:10.1007/s10683-007-9192-y · Cited by 428
Sutanto, J., Palme, E., Tan, C.-H., & Phang, C. W. (2013) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2013/37.4.07 · Cited by 412
Randomized Controlled Field Trials of Predictive Policing
Mohler, G. O., Short, M. B., Malinowski, S., Johnson, M., Tita, G. E., Bertozzi, A. L., & Brantingham, P. J. (2015) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.2015.1077710 · Cited by 381
Yildiz, Ö., Rommel, J., Debor, S., Holstenkamp, L., Mey, F., Müller, J. R., Radtke, J., & Rognli, J. (2015) · Energy Research & Social Science · doi:10.1016/j.erss.2014.12.001 · Cited by 366
Do Investors Care about Impact?
Heeb, F., Kölbel, J. F., Paetzold, F., & Zeisberger, S. (2023) · The Review of Financial Studies · doi:10.1093/rfs/hhac066 · Cited by 332
A multidisciplinary survey on discrimination analysis
Romei, A., & Ruggieri, S. (2014) · The Knowledge Engineering Review · doi:10.1017/s0269888913000039 · Cited by 288
Castilla, E. J. (2015) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2014.0950 · Cited by 255
Willingness to pay for insect-based food: The role of information and carrier
Lombardi, A., Vecchio, R., Borrello, M., Caracciolo, F., & Cembalo, L. (2019) · Food Quality and Preference · doi:10.1016/j.foodqual.2018.10.001 · Cited by 243
Information and College Access: Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment*
Oreopoulos, P., & Dunn, R. (2013) · The Scandinavian Journal of Economics · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9442.2012.01742.x · Cited by 192
Common Sense and Sociological Explanations
Watts, D. J. (2014) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/678271 · Cited by 176
No margin, no mission? A field experiment on incentives for public service delivery
Ashraf, N., Bandiera, O., & Jack, B. K. (2014) · Journal of Public Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jpubeco.2014.06.014 · Cited by 101
Bouwman, R., & Grimmelikhuijsen, S. (2016) · International Journal of Public Sector Management · doi:10.1108/ijpsm-07-2015-0129 · Cited by 95
Social Preferences: Some Thoughts from the Field
List, J. A. (2009) · Annual Review of Economics · doi:10.1146/annurev.economics.050708.142958 · Cited by 61
Self-citationStereotypes and false consensus: How financial professionals predict risk preferences
Roth, B., & Voskort, A. (2014) · Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization · doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2014.05.006 · Cited by 47
Leibbrandt, A., & List, J. (2018) · doi:10.3386/w25035 · Cited by 43
Self-citationBarreiro-Hurle, J., Dessart, F. J., Rommel, J., Czajkowski, M., Espinosa-Goded, M., Rodriguez-Entrena, M., Thomas, F., & Zagorska, K. (2023) · Food Policy · doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2023.102481 · Cited by 37
Rehabilitation and social behavior: Experiments in prison
Balafoutas, L., García-Gallego, A., Georgantzis, N., Jaber-Lopez, T., & Mitrokostas, E. (2020) · Games and Economic Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.geb.2019.10.009 · Cited by 36
Seeing the Bigger Picture? Ramping up Production with the Use of Augmented Reality
Wuttke, D., Upadhyay, A., Siemsen, E., & Wuttke-Linnemann, A. (2022) · Manufacturing & Service Operations Management · doi:10.1287/msom.2021.1070 · Cited by 36
Prieto, J. T., Zuleta, C., & Rodríguez, J. T. (2017) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1093/jamia/ocw102 · Cited by 32
List, J., Sadoff, S., & Wagner, M. (2010) · doi:10.3386/w15701 · Cited by 22
Self-citation‘Oops…I did it again’: Repeated focusing effects in reports of happiness
Dolan, P., & Metcalfe, R. (2010) · Journal of Economic Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.joep.2010.05.008 · Cited by 20
Efficient informal trade: Theory and experimental evidence from the Cape Town taxi market
Bengtsson, N. (2015) · Journal of Development Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jdeveco.2015.02.003 · Cited by 14
On the effects of incentive framing on bribery: evidence from an experiment in Burkina Faso
Armantier, O., & Boly, A. (2014) · Economics of Governance · doi:10.1007/s10101-013-0135-0 · Cited by 11
Introduction: Experiments in Public Management Research
James, O., Jilke, S., & Van Ryzin, G. G. (2017) · Experiments in Public Management Research · doi:10.1017/9781316676912.002 · Cited by 10
Gender, knowledge, and trust in artificial intelligence: A classroom-based randomized experiment.
Dávila, A., El Fassi, I., Oyon, D., & Rudolf, N. (2025) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-25002-7 · Cited by 3
Metadata
- Authors
- Harrison, G. W., & List, J. A.
- Venue
- Journal of Economic Literature
- Publisher
- American Economic Association
- Published
- 2004-11-01
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1009-1055
- ISSN
- 0022-0515 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4251446432
- Cited by
- 2,099
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 103.32
- 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
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.