{"id":876,"date":"2020-09-19T11:37:43","date_gmt":"2020-09-19T09:37:43","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/docenti-deps.unisi.it\/luigiluini\/?page_id=876"},"modified":"2020-09-19T11:43:42","modified_gmt":"2020-09-19T09:43:42","slug":"experimental-economics-phd-economics","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/docenti-deps.unisi.it\/luigiluini\/experimental-economics-phd-economics\/","title":{"rendered":"Experimental Economics \u2013 PhD Economics"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>Aims of the Course:<\/strong><br \/>\nEconomists&#8217; typical interests in strategic and market-based interactions raise particular<br \/>\nmethodological challenges and opportunities that are uniquely well suited for testing economic<br \/>\ntheories with experiments. The aims are: to provide and discuss the foundations of experimental<br \/>\neconomics; theory, design and running of Lab-Field experiments; to introduce a methodology for<br \/>\ndoing experimental research and achieving high internal and external validity. To present important<br \/>\nempirical findings in substantive areas of application: Games with social preferences, Neighborhood<br \/>\neffects and other-regarding preferences, Public goods, Team decision, Oligopoly and learning,<br \/>\nRationality, Risk and time. To offer the basic notions for analysing experimental data (Experimetrics)<br \/>\nand conducting Meta-analysis.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Classes<\/strong>:<br \/>\nTuesday, September 15, 11:00-13:00 (Luini)<br \/>\nFriday, September 18, 16:00-18:00 (Valori)<br \/>\nThursday, September 24, 14:00-16:00 (Luini)<br \/>\nMonday, September 28, 16:00-18:00 (Luini, Valori)<br \/>\nTuesday, October 6, 14:00-16:00 (Luini, Valori)<br \/>\nWednesday, October 7, 14:00-16:00 (Luini)<br \/>\nTuesday, October 13, 14:00-16:00 (Colucci, Valori)<br \/>\nWednesday, October 14, 14:00-16:00 &#8211; (Luini)<br \/>\nTuesday, October 20, 11:00-13:00 (Valori, Guest: Marini)<br \/>\nTuesday, October 27, 11:00-13:00 (Colucci, Guest: Marini)<\/p>\n<p><strong>Syllabus<\/strong><br \/>\n(<strong>Remark:<\/strong> The reading list should be regarded as a reference list and most of the attention will be devoted to readings with a star *, which are recommended readings)<\/p>\n<p>1. Lab and Field Methodology (Lecturer: Luigi Luini)<br \/>\nThis lecture is designed to familiarize the student with experimental methodology and the range of<br \/>\napplication of experimental methods in economics, in order to investigate the merits (and limits) of<br \/>\nexperiments, the principles of conducting an experiment, and provide an overview for the different<br \/>\ntype of experiments. A major advantage of experiments is that exogenous treatment variations<br \/>\nallow identifying causal relationships between treatment and observed behavior. At the same time<br \/>\nexperimental datasets often come with small sample size, variables might be discrete, and<br \/>\ninteraction between subjects in the laboratory or repeated measurements create violations of<br \/>\nindependency assumptions.<br \/>\nReferences<br \/>\n-Guala, F., 2005, The Methodology of Experimental Economics, Cambridge UP<br \/>\n*Plott, C., 1987, Dimensions of Parallelism: Some Policy Applications of Experimental Methods, in: Roth, A.,<br \/>\nExperimental Economics: Six Points of View, Cambridge UP<br \/>\n-Fr\u00e9chette, G.R., and Schotter, A. (eds.), 2015, Handbook of Experimental Economic Methodology. Oxford UP<br \/>\n-Levitt, S. D. and List, J. A., 2009, Field experiments in economics: The past, the present, and the future, European<br \/>\nEconomic Review<br \/>\n-Ostrom, E., 2010, Revising theory in light of experimental findings, Journal of Economic Behavior &amp; Organization<\/p>\n<p>2. Playing games having Social Preferences: Ultimatum, Dictator and Trust (Lecturer: Vincenzo<br \/>\nValori)<br \/>\nIn this lecture we will introduce and discuss three relevant games whose experimental results are<br \/>\nusually at odds with classical game theory predictions. Alternative possible explanations of these<br \/>\ndeviations between theory and empirical observations will be presented with a focus on the concept<br \/>\nof Social Preferences.<br \/>\nReferences<br \/>\n&#8211; Camerer, C., Thaler, R., 1995. Anomalies: Ultimatums, Dictators and Manners. The Journal of Economic Perspectives,<br \/>\n9(2), 209-219.<br \/>\n&#8211; Thaler, R., 1988. Anomalies: The Ultimatum Game. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2(4), 195-206.<br \/>\n* G\u00fcth, W., Schmittberger, R., Schwarze, B., 1982. An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining. Journal of<br \/>\nEconomic Behavior &amp; Organization, 3(4), 367-388.<br \/>\n&#8211; Binmore, K.,Shaked, A., Sutton, J., 1985. Testing Noncooperative Bargaining Theory: A Preliminary Study. The American<br \/>\nEconomic Review, 75(5), 1178-1180.<br \/>\n&#8211; Gueth, W., Tietz, R., 1986. Ultimatum Bargaining for a Shrinking Cake \u2014 An Experimental Analysis. In Tietz R., Albers<br \/>\nW., Selten R. (eds) Bounded Rational Behavior in Experimental Games and Markets. Lecture Notes in Economics and<br \/>\nMathematical Systems. Vol. 314.<br \/>\n&#8211; Forsythe, R., Horowitz, J.L., Savin, N.E., Sefton, M., 1994. Fairness in Simple Bargaining Experiments. Games and<br \/>\nEconomic Behavior. 6(3), 347-369.<br \/>\n* Berg, J., Dickhaut, J., McCabe, K., 1995. Trust, Reciprocity, and Social History. Games and Economic Behavior. 10(1),<br \/>\n122-142.<br \/>\n&#8211; Sutter, M., Kocher, M.G., 2007. Trust and trustworthiness across different age groups. Games and Economic Behavior.<br \/>\n59(2), 364-382.<br \/>\n&#8211; Fehr, E., Kirchsteiger, G., Riedl, A., 1993. Does Fairness Prevent Market Clearing? An Experimental Investigation. The<br \/>\nQuarterly Journal of Economics, 108(2), 437-459.<br \/>\n&#8211; Fehr, E., Falk, A., 1999. Wage Rigidity in a Competitive Incomplete Contract Market. Journal of Political Economy,<br \/>\n107(1), 106-134.<\/p>\n<p>3. Neighborhood effects and other-regarding preferences (Lecturer: Luigi Luini)<br \/>\nIndividual choices are seldom completely self-determined. We review the main results of the<br \/>\nexperimental literature on social preferences with particular reference to neighborhood effects.<br \/>\nReferences<br \/>\n-Cooper D, J H Kagel, 2013, Other-Regarding Preferences: A selective Survey of Experimental Results, in: The Handbook<br \/>\nof Experimental Economics, Kagel, JH, A. Roth, Eds, Princeton UP;<br \/>\n*Luini, L., A.M. Nese, P. Sbriglia 2014, Social influence in trustors\u2019 neighborhood, Journal of Behavioral and Experimental<br \/>\nEconomics<br \/>\n-Slonim, R.; A.E. Roth, 1998, Learning in High Stakes Ultimatum Games: An Experiment in the Slovak. Republic,<br \/>\nEconometrica<br \/>\n-Camerer, C.F., E. Fehr, 2006, When Does &#8216;Economic Man&#8217; Dominate Social Behavior?, Science, 311, 6<\/p>\n<p>4. Cooperation (Lecturers: Luigi Luini and Vincenzo Valori)<br \/>\nIntroduction to public good games among peers, with and without punishment.<br \/>\nMarted\u00ec<br \/>\nReferences<br \/>\n-Andreoni, J., J.H. Miller, 1993, Rational cooperation in the finitely repeated prisoner&#8217;s dilemma: Experimental evidence,<br \/>\nEconomic Journal<br \/>\n*Casari, M; L. Luini, 2012, Peer Punishment in Teams: Expressive or Instrumental Choice, Experimental Economics, 241\u2013<br \/>\n259<br \/>\n*Fehr, E., G\u00e4chter, S., 2002. Altruistic punishment in humans, Nature, 415, 137\u2013140.<br \/>\n-Fehr, E., G\u00e4echter, S., 2000. Cooperation and punishment in public goods experiments, American Economic Review,<br \/>\n980\u2013994.<\/p>\n<p>5. Team decision: Financial and symbolic incentives (Lecturers: Luigi Luini and Vincenzo Valori)<br \/>\nDiscussion of how (different styles of) leadership and (different types of) incentives interact in teams.<br \/>\nReferences<br \/>\n-Camerer, C., R. Hogarth, 1999, The Effects of Financial Incentives in Experiments, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty<br \/>\n-Duersch, P., J Oechssler, B.C. Schipper, 2009, Incentives for subjects in internet experiments, Economics Letters<br \/>\n-Akerlof, G.A., R.E Kranton, 2005, Identity and the economics of organizations, Journal of Economic Perspectives<br \/>\n*Farolfi, F., L. Luini, 2019, The impact of transactional and charismatic leadership on cooperation: An experimental study, wp<\/p>\n<p>6. O ligopoly: Learning to intensify and relax competition (Lecturer: Luigi Luini)<br \/>\nExperimental games under different information structures reveal that the level of competiton is<br \/>\nstrongly influenced by the number of oligopolists, by the type of interaction (one-shot versus<br \/>\nrepeated), and by communication (compulsory versus voluntary). Presentation of experiments in<br \/>\nwhich the level of competition increases\/decreases.<br \/>\nReferences<br \/>\n-Normann, S.H., H.T. Oechssler, 2004, Two are few and four are many: Number effects in experimental oligopolies.<br \/>\nJournal of Economic Behavior and Organization<br \/>\n*Altavilla, C., L. Luini, P. Sbriglia, 2006, Social learning in market games, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization<br \/>\n-Fonseca, M.A., H.T. Normann, 2012, Explicit vs. tacit collusion: The impact of communication in oligopoly experiments,<br \/>\nEuropean Economic Review<br \/>\n-Engel, C. (2007). How much collusion? A meta-analysis of oligopoly experiments, Journal of Competition Law and<br \/>\nEconomics<br \/>\n-Abbink, K., J. Brandts, (2009) Collusion in growing and shrinking markets: Empirical evidence from experimental duopolies, WP<\/p>\n<p>7. Rationality in Games (Lecturers: Domenico Colucci and Vincenzo Valori)<br \/>\nA way to account for subjects making unpredictable choices in experimental games is to invoke a<br \/>\nlack of rationality. Is this a viable explanation of observed behavior (at least under certain<br \/>\ncircumstances)?<br \/>\nReferences<br \/>\n* Nagel, R., 1995. Unraveling in Guessing Games: An Experimental Study. American Economic Review, 85(5), 1313-1326.<br \/>\n&#8211; Duffy, J., Nagel, R. 1997. On the robustness of behaviour in experimental &#8216;beauty contest&#8217; games. Economic Journal,<br \/>\n107, 1684-1700.<br \/>\n&#8211; Ho, T., Camerer, C., Weigelt, K., 1998. Iterated Dominance and Iterated Best Response in Experimental &#8220;p-Beauty<br \/>\nContests&#8221;. The American Economic Review, 88(4), 947-969.<br \/>\n&#8211; Bosch-Dom\u00e8nech, A., Montalvo, J., Nagel, R., Satorra, A., 2002. One, Two, (Three), Infinity, &#8230; : Newspaper and Lab<br \/>\nBeauty-Contest Experiments. The American Economic Review, 92(5), 1687-1701.<br \/>\n&#8211; Grosskopf, B., Nagel, R., 2008. The two-person beauty contest. Games and Economic Behavior, 62, 93-99.<br \/>\n&#8211; Grehl S., Tuti\u0107 A., 2015. Experimental Evidence on Iterated Reasoning in Games. PLoS ONE, 10(8).<br \/>\n* Goeree, J., &amp; Holt, C., 2001. Ten Little Treasures of Game Theory and Ten Intuitive Contradictions. The American<br \/>\nEconomic Review, 91(5), 1402-1422.<\/p>\n<p>8. Rationality: Risk and Time (Lecturer: Luigi Luini)<br \/>\nRisk and time play different roles in economic choices: we discuss how they interact in the lab with<br \/>\nparticular reference to individual impatience and risk attitude.<br \/>\nReferences<br \/>\n*Andreoni, J., P. Feldman, C. Sprenger, 2017, A stream of prospects or a prospect of streams: On the evaluation of<br \/>\nintertemporal risks, WP<br \/>\n-Anderhub, V., W. Guth, U. Gneezy, D. Sonsino, 2001, On the interaction of risk and time preferences: An experimental<br \/>\nstudy, German Economic Review<br \/>\n-Andersen, S., G. Harrison, M. Lau, E. Rutstr\u00f6m, 2008, Eliciting Risk and Time Preferences, Econometrica<br \/>\n-Dohmen, T., A. Falk, D. Huffman, U. Sunde, 2010, Are Risk Aversion and Impatience Related to Cognitive Ability?<br \/>\nAmerican Economic Review<br \/>\n-Halevy, Y., 2008, Strotz meets Allais: Diminishing impatience and the certainty effect, American Economic Review<\/p>\n<p>9. The Experimetrics of Treatment Testing (Lecturer: Matteo M. Marini)<br \/>\nThis lecture is conceived as an introduction to the analysis of experimental data and, in particular, to<br \/>\na very basic class of techniques known as treatment tests, which are designed to compare outcomes<br \/>\nwith and without a treatment (or before and after a treatment). Such techniques will be shown using<br \/>\nStata: datasets and programming files will be made available prior to the lecture, and for the sake of<br \/>\ninteraction it will be necessary to have Stata pre-installed on your laptop (any Stata version from 12<br \/>\nto 16 is ok). For any query, please do not hesitate to contact the lecturer<br \/>\n(matteom.marini@gmail.com).<br \/>\nRemark: Help for new Stata users<br \/>\nIt is highly recommended for new Stata users to join this official free webinar by StataCorp, which takes place on<br \/>\nOctober 1, 2020 at 3 pm GMT (registration deadline: September 29, 2020). The organizers usually send slides and<br \/>\nrecordings to participants after the webinars, therefore registration is recommended even in case you cannot attend.<br \/>\nReferences<br \/>\n*Moffatt, P.G., 2015. Experimetrics: Econometrics for Experimental Economics. Chapter 3. London: Palgrave Macmillan.<\/p>\n<p>10. Meta-analysis: What is it and how to conduct one (Lecturer: Matteo M. Marini)<br \/>\nThe lecture illustrates techniques of meta-analysis and the relative advantages of conducting metaanalyses<br \/>\nas compared with narrative literature reviews. The various steps to perform a metaanalysis<br \/>\nwill be presented in combination with Stata commands and datasets from the experimental<br \/>\nliterature.<br \/>\nReferences<br \/>\n*Stanley, T.D., 2001. Wheat from chaff: Meta-analysis as quantitative literature review. Journal of Economic<br \/>\nPerspectives, 15(3): 131-150.<br \/>\n&#8211; Engel, C., 2011. Dictator games: A meta study. Experimental Economics, 14(4): 583-610.<br \/>\n&#8211; Johnson, N.D., and Mislin, A.A., 2011. Trust games: A meta-analysis. Journal of Economic Psychology, 32(5): 865-889.<br \/>\n&#8211; Lane, T., 2016. Discrimination in the laboratory: A meta-analysis of economics experiments. European Economic<br \/>\nReview, 90: 375-402.<br \/>\nGeneral bibliography references<br \/>\n-Bardsley, N., R. Cubitt, G. Loomes, P. Moffatt, C. Starmer, R. Sugden, 2010, Experimental Economics:<br \/>\nRethinking the Rules, Princeton University Press<br \/>\n-Camerer, C. ,2003, Behavioral Game Theory. Experiments in Strategic Interaction, Princeton University Press<br \/>\n-Kagel, J. H. and Roth, A. E., eds, 1995, The Handbook of Experimental Economics, Princeton University Press<br \/>\n-Plott, C. R., V. L., Smith, eds., 2008, Handbook of Experimental Economics Result in Economics, Elsevier,<br \/>\nNorth-Holland<br \/>\n-Friedman, D., S. Sunder, 1994, Experimental Methods: A Primer for Economists, Cambridge University Press<br \/>\n-Guala, F., 2005, The Methodology of Experimental Economics, Cambridge University Press<br \/>\n-Fr\u00e9chette, G.R., and Schotter, A. (eds.), 2015, Handbook of Experimental Economic Methodology, Oxford UP<br \/>\n-Holland, P. W., 1986, Statistics and causal inference, Journal of the American Statistical Association<br \/>\nIntroduction to experiments<br \/>\n-Smith, V.,1962, An Experimental Study of Competitive Market Behavior, Journal of Political Economy<br \/>\n-Smith, V., 1982, Microeconomic Systems as an Experimental Science, American Economic Review<br \/>\n-Mullainathan, S., R. Thaler, 2000, Behavioral Economics, International Encyclopedia of the Social and<br \/>\nBehavioral Sciences<\/p>\n<p><strong>Exam<\/strong><br \/>\nStudents shall write an essay. Each student can choose a topic among those covered in class or<br \/>\npropose his own. A written proposal, indicating (1) the elective topic and (2) the main references,<br \/>\nshall be submitted to and discussed with the lecturers within October 20. The final version of the<br \/>\nessay (Approximate length: 10 pages) is due within November 15.<br \/>\nSeptember 15, 2020<br \/>\nDomenico Colucci (domenico. colucci@unifi.it)<br \/>\nLuigi Luini (luigi.luini@unisi.it)<br \/>\nVincenzo Valori (vincenzo.valori@unifi.it)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Aims of the Course: Economists&#8217; typical interests in strategic and market-based interactions raise particular methodological challenges and opportunities that are uniquely well suited for testing economic theories with experiments. The aims are: to provide and discuss the foundations of experimental economics; theory, design and running of Lab-Field experiments; to introduce a methodology for doing experimental &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/docenti-deps.unisi.it\/luigiluini\/experimental-economics-phd-economics\/\" class=\"more-link\">Leggi tutto<span class=\"screen-reader-text\"> &#8220;Experimental Economics \u2013 PhD Economics&#8221;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-876","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/docenti-deps.unisi.it\/luigiluini\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/876","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/docenti-deps.unisi.it\/luigiluini\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/docenti-deps.unisi.it\/luigiluini\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/docenti-deps.unisi.it\/luigiluini\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/docenti-deps.unisi.it\/luigiluini\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=876"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/docenti-deps.unisi.it\/luigiluini\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/876\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":880,"href":"https:\/\/docenti-deps.unisi.it\/luigiluini\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/876\/revisions\/880"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/docenti-deps.unisi.it\/luigiluini\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=876"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}