Hostname: page-component-7b9c58cd5d-6tpvb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-15T08:52:33.959Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Linear Public Goods Experiments: A Meta-Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2025

Jennifer Zelmer
Jennifer Zelmer*
Affiliation:
Graduate Student, Department of Economics, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
*
email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective: To use meta-analysis techniques to assess the impact of various factors on the extent of cooperation in standard linear public goods experiments using the voluntary contributions mechanism.

Data Sources: Potentially relevant experiments were identified through searches of EconLit, the Internet Documents in Economics Access Service (IDEAS), and a survey article.

Review Methods: A total of 349 potentially relevant studies were identified. Of these, 27 (representing a total of 711 groups of participants) met the inclusion criteria. Data were abstracted from these studies using a standardized protocol. Results were analyzed using weighted ordinary least squares. Average group efficiency was the dependent variable.

Results: The marginal per capita return, communication, constant group composition over the session (“partners”), positive framing, and the use of children as subjects had a positive and significant effect (p < 0.05) on the average level of contribution to the public good. Heterogeneous endowments to subjects, experienced participants, and soliciting subjects’ beliefs regarding other participants’ behaviour prior to the start of the session/period had a negative and significant effect. A number of other factors were not identified as significant.

Conclusion: The meta-analysis results parallel several key findings from previous literature reviews. In addition, they offer parameter estimates and an analysis of significance based on the totality of the available research evidence. More consistent reporting of the results of experiments would greatly improve the ability to conduct this type of research.

Keywords

public goodsvoluntary contributionexperimentmeta-analysis

JEL classification

H41: Public Goods C9: Design of Experiments C70: General B40: General
Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Economics , Volume 6 , Issue 3 , November 2003 , pp. 299 - 310
Copyright
Copyright © 2003 Economic Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

American Economics Association. (September 26, 1999). http://www.econlit.org/econlit/ellistjn.html.Google Scholar
Baaijens, S.R., Nijkamp, P., and van Montfort, K. (1998). “Explanatory Meta-Analysis for Comparison and Transfer of Regional Tourist Income Multipliers.” Regional Studies. 32(9), 839–849.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, M. and Oxman, A.D. (eds.). (1999). Cochrane Reviewers’ Handbook 4.1.5 [Updated April 2002]. In The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2002. Oxford: Update Software.Google Scholar
Croson, R.T.A. and Marks, M.B. (2000). “Step Returns in Threshold Public Goods: A Meta- and Experimental Analysis.” Experimental Economics. 2, 239–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Solla Price, D. (1981). “The Development and Structure of the Biomedical Literature.” In Warren, K. (ed.), Coping with the Biomedical Literature. New York: Praeger Publishers. Cited inGoogle Scholar
Siegel, E.R. et. al. (1990). “Bibliographic-Retrieval Systems.” In Shortliffe, E.H., et. al. (eds.), Medical Informatics: Computer Applications in Health Care. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Espey, M. (1998). “Gasoline Demand Revisited: An International Meta-Analysis of Elasticities.” Energy Economics. 20(3), 273–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glass, G.V., McGaw, B., and Smith, M.L. (1981). Meta-Analysis in Social Research. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Hunter, J.E. et al. (1982). Meta Analysis: Cumulating Research Findings Across Studies. Studying Organizations: Innovations in Methodology Number 4. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Ledyard, J.O. (1995). “Public Goods: A Survey of Experimental Research.” In Kagel, J. and Roth, A. (eds.), The Handbook of Experimental Economics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Moher, D. et al. For the QUORUM Group. (1999). “Improving the Quality of Reports of Meta-Analyses of Randomised Controlled Trials: The QUORUM Statement.” The Lancet. 354(9193), 1896–1900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palfrey, T. and Porter, R. (1991). “Guidelines for Submission of Manuscripts on Experimental Economics.” Econometrica. 59(4), 1197–1198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pigou, A.C. (1932). The Economics of Welfare. 4th edn. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Plath, I. (1992). Understanding Meta-Analysis: A Consumer's Guide to Aims, Problems, Evaluation, and Developments. Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlagsgellschaft.Google Scholar
Rosenthal, R. (1991). “Meta-Analysis: A Review.” Psychosomatic Medicine. 53(3), 247–271.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stanley, T.D. (1998). “New Wine in Old Bottles: A Meta-Analysis of Ricardian Equivalence.” Southern Economic Journal. 64(3), 713–727.Google Scholar
Van den Bergh, J.C.J.M., Button, K.J., Nijkamp, P., and Pepping, GC. (1997). Meta-Analysis in Environmental Economics. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolf, F.M. (1986). Meta-Analysis: Quantitative Methods for Research Synthesis. Beverly Hills: SAGE Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Appendix A: References for studies included in the meta-analysis

Andreoni, J. (1988). “Why Free Ride? Strategies and Learning in Public Goods Experiments.” Journal of Public Economics. 37(3), 291–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andreoni, J. (1995a). “Cooperation in Public Goods Experiments: Kindness or Confusion?” American Economic Review. 85(4), 891–904.Google Scholar
Andreoni, J. (1995b). “Warm-Glow versus Cold-Pickle: The Effects of Positive and Negative Framing on Cooperation in Experiments.” Quarterly Journal of Economics. 110(1), 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asch, P., Gigliotti, G., and Polito, J.A. (1993). “Free Riding with Discrete and Continuous Public Goods: Some Experimental Evidence.” Public Choice. 77(2), 293–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cason, T.N. and Khan, F.I. (1999). “A Laboratory Study of Voluntary Public Goods Provision with Imperfect Monitoring and Communication.” Journal of Development Economics. 58(2), 533–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Croson, R.T.A. (1996). “Partners and Strangers Revisited.” Economics Letters. 53(1), 25–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Croson, R.T.A. (2000). “Thinking Like a Game Theorist: Factors Affecting the Frequency of Equilibrium Play.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization. 41(3), 299–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dorsey, R.E. (1992). “The Voluntary Contributions Mechanism with Real Time Revisions.” Public Choice. 73(3), 261–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falkinger, J., Fehr, E., Gächter, S., and Winter-Ebmer, R. (1999). “A Simple Mechanism for the Efficient Provision of Public Goods—Experimental Evidence.” Working Paper No. 3. Zurich: Institute for Empirical Research in Economics, University of Zurich. Subsequently published as Falkinger.Google Scholar
Fehr, J., Gächter, E., Gächter, S., and Winter- Ebmer, R. (2000). “A Simple Mechanism for the Efficient Provision of Public Goods: Experimental Evidence.” American Economic Review. 90(1), 247–264.Google Scholar
Fehr, E. and Gächter, S. (1999). Cooperation and Punishment in Public Goods Experiments. Paper available through Internet Documents in Economics Access Service. Subsequently published as Fehr, E. and Gächter, S. (2000). “Cooperation and Punishment in Public Goods Experiments.” American Economic Review. 90(4), 980–994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, J. et al. (1995). “Heterogeneous Demand for Public Goods: Behavior in the Voluntary Contributions Mechanism.” Public Choice. 85(3/4), 249–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gächter, S., Fehr, E., and Kment, C. (1996). “Does Social Exchange Increase Voluntary Cooperation?” Kyklos. 49(4), 541–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goeree, H., Holt, C.A., and Laury, S.K. (1999). Altruism and Noisy Behavior in One-Shot Public Goods Experiments. Paper available through Internet Documents in Economics Access Service. Subsequently published as Goeree, H., Holt, C.A., and Laury, S.K. (2002). “Private Costs and Public Benefits: Unraveling the Effects of Altruism and Noisy Behavior.” Journal of Public Economics. 83(2), 257–278.Google Scholar
Harbaugh, W.T. and Krause, K. (2000). “Children's Altruism in Public Good and Dictator Experiments.” Economic Inquiry. 38(1), 95–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Isaac, R.M. and Walker, J.M. (1988a). “Communication and Free-Riding Behavior: The Voluntary Contribution Mechanism.” Economic Inquiry. 26(4), 585–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Isaac, R.M. and Walker, J.M. (1988b). “Group Size Effects in Public Goods Provision: The Voluntary Contribution Mechanism.” Quarterly Journal of Economics. 103(1), 179–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Isaac, R.M. and Walker, J.M. (1998). “Nash as an Organizing Principle in the Voluntary Provision of Public Goods: Experimental Evidence.” Experimental Economics. 87(5), 829–846.Google Scholar
Isaac, R.M., Walker, J.M., and Thomas, S.H. (1984). “Divergent Evidence on Free Riding: An Experimental Examination of Possible Explanations.” Public Choice. 43, 113–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Isaac, R.M., Walker, J.M., and Williams, A.W. (1994). “Group Size and the Voluntary Provision of Public Goods: Experimental Evidence Utilizing Large Groups.” Journal of Public Economics. 54(1), 1–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keser, C. and van Winden, F. (1996). Partners Contribute More to Public Goods than Strangers: Conditional Cooperation. Paper available through Internet Documents in Economics Access Service. Subsequently published as Keser, C. and van Winden, F. (2000). “Conditional Cooperation and Voluntary Contributions to Public Goods.” Scandinavian Journal of Economics. 102(1), 23–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laury, S.K., Walker, J.M., and Williams, A.W. (1995). “Anonymity and the Voluntary Provision of Public Goods.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization. 27(3), 365–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCorkle, S. and Watts, M. (1996). “Free Riding Indexes for Ukrainian Economics Teachers.” Journal of Economic Education. 27(3), 233–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nowell, C. and Tinkler, S. (1994). “The Influence of Gender on the Provision of a Public Good.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization. 25(1), 25–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ockenfels, A. and Weimann, J. (1999). “Types and Patterns: An Experimental East-West German Comparison of Cooperation and Solidarity.” Journal of Public Economics. 71(2), 275–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saijo, T. and Nakamura, H. (1995). “The ‘Spite’ Dilemma in Voluntary Contribution Mechanism Experiments.” Journal of Conflict Resolution. 39(3), 535–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weimann, J. (1994). “Individual Behavior in a Free-Riding Experiment.” Journal of Public Economics. 54(1), 1–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, R.K. and Sell, J. (1997). “‘Liar, Liar…’ : Cheap Talk and Reputation in Related Public Goods Settings.” Journal of Conflict Resolution. 41(5), 695–717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar