This paper studies the contribution behavior and cooperation of subjects in different immigration situations via a dynamic public good game. This dynamic environment, in which a subject’s income at the end of the decision will become an endowment for the next decision, also offers an opportunity to study growth as measured by group income and inequality via the Gini coefficient. Overall, contribution does not converge to zero, nor does it decrease over time, and subjects are very contributive in nature. The best scenario to boost contributions among subjects is when immigrants reduce a subject’s income in the current period, but promise to increase growth in the future. In all treatments, inequality significantly increases over time for the unsuccessful group (below the median group income), while the successful group (above the median group income) mostly has lower inequality with a constant, or slightly increasing, trend. There is a positive relationship between growth and inequality in the treatment where immigrants have no impact on subjects’ income, and also where immigrants reduce subjects’ income without future promise. This positive relationship implies that the group growth can be achieved only with an increase in inequality (or less cooperation between subjects). However, a slightly negative relationship occurs in the scenario where the immigrants reduce subjects’ income in the current period, but promise to increase growth in the future. This negative relationship implies that group growth can be achieved without any inequality (or more cooperation between subjects). The overall findings in this paper provide insights into the contribution behavior and cooperation of subjects, when considering the different economic impacts of immigrants in their society.

The Caught Being Good Game (CBGG) is a classroom management intervention used in schools. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of point visibility on appropriate behavior, to examine the degree to which points earned by the opposing team affected the other team’s behavior, to examine both teacher and student preference for the intervention, the effect of student and teacher choice on appropriate behavior, and to systematically replicate previous research showing the effectiveness of the CBGG relative to business as usual. Consistent with previous research, CBGG increased on-task behavior compared to business as usual. Modest and temporary differentiation was observed between salient and hidden points, with hidden resulting in slightly better outcomes. A unit-price analysis further supported that on-task behavior was higher during the hidden points condition. The teacher and students reported preference for the CBGG, and we expect to see higher levels of on-task behavior during the student-choice condition.

This study evaluated the relative contributions of behavior specific praise statements (BSPS) and the Caught Being Good Game (CBGG) on class-wide appropriate behaviors and examined teacher use of BSPS and corrective feedback. It also evaluated if changes in class-wide behaviors are maintained during follow-up and generalized to non-target academic periods. Data on teacher use of BSPS were also collected during follow-up and generalization probes to examine if the teachers continued to use BSPS during follow-up and generalize their use of BSPS to non-target academic periods. A multiple-baseline design across classrooms with an ABC sequence was used to evaluate the outcomes of the interventions. The results indicated that BSPS was sufficient in two classrooms to increase class-wide on-task behavior for over 90% of students just by explicitly giving attention for appropriate behaviors while the third classroom required implementation of CBGG which provided external reinforcers. Some evidence of generalization and maintenance was observed in all classrooms. All teaching staff's use of BSPS increased during implementation of the BSPS phase, but BSPS use decreased in follow-up, and support for generalization is lacking.

This study got its origin in the failed climate negotiations in the Copenhagen 2009 summit. By conducting a public good game, with participants from China and Sweden, my study indicates that previous studies on public good games can predict the outcome of the game to a quit large extent even though most of my statistical tests came out statistically insignificant. My study also indicates that by framing the game as climate negotiations there were no statistical significant difference on the level of contributions in comparison to the unframed versions of the game. The awareness of the issues with emissions, global warming and other environmental problems are pretty high but even so when push comes to shove gains in the short run are prioritized to gains in the long run. There are however hypothetical willingness to come to term with the environmental issues. The results of the study indicate that the outcome of the Copenhagen summit can be avoidable but would need additional experiments made on cultural differences and behavior.

Cette thèse contient trois essais sur la coopération, mesurée à travers les contributions dans le jeu du bien public.Dans le premier chapitre, je propose une revue de la littérature sur l’hétérogénéité dans les jeux de bienpublic linéaires. Je distingue deux types d’hétérogénéité : l’hétérogénéité en dotation et l’hétérogénéité en rendement du bien public (c’est-à-dire en MPCR). Malgré un conflit normatif exacerbé, les agents hétérogènes contribuent autant au bien public que des agents homogènes. Sont-ils en mesure d’utiliser des mécanismes pour atteindre l’efficience (une provision complète du bien public) ? Mes résultats sont nuancés. Les agents hétérogènes en dotation sont capables de "s’autogouverner" et d’atteindre l’efficiencetandis que les agents hétérogènes en MPCR ne parviennent pas parfaitement à surmonter le problème de la sous-provision du bien public.Dans le deuxième chapitre, co-écrit avec Adam Zylbersztejn, nous étudions les effets d’un risque environnemental sur la coopération. Nous appelons risque environnemental une situation dans laquelle le rendement du bien public est risqué au moment de la décision. Nous considérons, dans notre expérience, deux types de risque : un risque individuel (le MPCR est déterminé indépendamment pour chaque membre du groupe) et un risque collectif (le MPCR est le même pour chaque membre du groupe). Nous constatons que le risque n’affecte pas la coopération : les sujets ne contribuent pas différemment au bien public lorsque le MPCR est certain ou lorsqu’il est risqué.Dans le troisième chapitre, j’examine les effets d’un mécanisme fondé sur la compétition intragroupe pour financer des biens publics. Dans mon expérience, les agents sont en compétition pour obtenir un MPCR plus élevé. Le rang dans la compétition - et donc le MPCR - dépend de la façon dont la contribution d’une personne se classe au sein de son groupe. Je trouve que la compétition n’améliore la provision des biens publics que lorsqu’elle ne génère pas d’inégalités trop importantes. / This thesis contains three essays on cooperation, observed through the contributions in the Public Good Game. In the first chapter, I survey the literature on heterogeneity in linear Public Good Games. I distinguish two kinds of heterogeneity: heterogeneity in endowment and heterogeneity in return from the public good (i.e. MPCR). Despite a normative conflict exacerbated, heterogeneous agents contribute as much as homogeneous agents to the public good. Are they able to use mechanisms to reach efficiency (i.e. a full provision of the public good)? I find mixed evidence. Agents heterogeneous in endowment are able to govern themselves and to reach efficiency while agents heterogeneous in MPCR do not perfectly overcome the underprovision problem.In the second chapter, co-written with Adam Zylbersztejn, we investigate the effects of environmental risk on cooperation. We call an environmental risk a situation in which the return of the public good is risky at the time of the decision. We consider, in our experiment, two kinds of risk: an individual one (i.e. the MPCR is determined independently for each group member) and a collective one (i.e. the MPCR is the same for each group member). We find that risk does not affect cooperation: subjects do not contribute to the public good differently when the MPCR is certain or when it is risky.In the third chapter, I investigate the effects of a mechanism based on within-group competition to provide public goods. In my experimental treatments, agents compete for a higher MPCR from the public good. The rank in the competition - and therefore the MPCR - depends on how one’s contribution ranks within the group. I find that competition improves public goods provision only when it does not generate too large inequalities.

No description available.

This work statistically analyses hypotheses about the presence of antisocial punishment in study of economic experiments. Analysed data source is author's own ABM simulation of antisocial punishment environment. Tested hypotheses and ABM simulations are evolutionary oriented. This represents natural selection of evolving agents (and their groups) interacting with one another. Work is divided by two independent parts of presumptions. Crucial hypothesis of the first part is evolutional advantage from retaliatory punishment, the second part tests hypotheses of evolutional benefits resulting from group selection. Findings of the analysis allow us to accept these crucial hypothesis, and it may be concluded, that antisocial punishment can be regard as an evolutionary advantage, which directly advantages individuals, as well as whole groups.

Cette thèse vise analyser les déterminants (objectifs et subjectifs) à l’origine de l'hétérogénéité des évaluations de projets. Dans un premier temps, j'analyserai comment les quantités (objectives) sont incorporées dans l'analyse coût-bénéfice. Le premier chapitre principal traite de la manière dont l'analyse coût-bénéfice est affectée par la distribution temporelle des impacts considérée. À travers l'exemple du changement d'affectation des terres provenant de la production de biocarburants, il ressort que les décisions concernant les projets ayant des impacts environnementaux non constants dans le temps s'appuient sur des valeurs actuelles nettes biaisées, ce qui peut entraîner la mise en œuvre de projets en réalité non souhaitables ou la non-implémentation de projets réellement souhaitables. Ce travail est à la fois théorique et numérique.Ensuite, j'étudie le rôle de la structure des préférences sur la prise de décision individuelle dans un cadre individuel puis un cadre collectif. Au niveau individuel, nous développons un modèle théorique qui permet soit de la substituabilité, soit de la complémentarité entre les biens en fonction du contexte (revenu et qualité de l'environnement). Il en résulte que l'élasticité-revenu du consentement à payer marginal peut être négative dans un contexte de substituabilité inter-biens, ce qui contraste avec les modèles habituels qui ne permettent que des élasticités positives du revenu (le bien environnemental ne peut jamais être inférieur mais est toujours normal). Notre cadre théorique affecte également la façon dont la consommation et la qualité de l'environnement sont actualisées, ce qui est d'autant plus pertinent dans un contexte de chocs sur les revenus. Au niveau collectif, j’utilise une approche expérimentale pour analyser l'effet de l'interaction entre les individus ayant des structures de préférences différentes sur les contributions au bien public. Il en résulte que la substituabilité parfaite est associée à un plus grand nombre de passagers clandestins que la complémentarité. Cependant, une aversion à l'inégalité avantageuse émerge également des individus dont les préférences sont à l'origine d'une parfaite substituabilité vis-à-vis de ceux dont les préférences sont fondées sur la complémentarité. / This thesis aims at providing insights on the (objective and subjective) determinants of the heterogeneity of project evaluations. At first, I analyze how (objective) quantities are incorporated in the cost-benefit analysis. The first main chapter deals with the way cost-benefit analysis is affected by the time distribution of impacts considered. Through the example of land use change from biofuel production, I find that decisions regarding projects with non-constant environmental impacts rely on distorted net present values, which may result in the implementation of actually non-desirable projects or the non-implementation of actually desirable projects. This work is both theoretical and numerical.Second, I investigate the role of the structure of preferences, i.e. whether private goods and environmental goods are substitutable or complementary in providing utility, on individual decision-making in an individual framework and a collective framework. At the individual level (second main chapter), we develop a theoretical model which allows either for substitutability or complementarity depending on the context (income and environmental quality). It results that the income elasticity of willingness to pay can be negative in contexts of between-goods substitutability, which contrasts with usual frameworks which only allow for positive income elasticities (thus the environmental good can never be inferior but is always normal). Our framework also affects the way consumption and environmental quality are discounted, which is all the more relevant in the context of income shocks. At the collective level (third main chapter), we use an experimental approach to analyze the effect of the interaction between individuals with different structures of preferences on contributions to the public good. It results that perfect substitutability is associated with more free-riding than complementarity. However, an aversion to advantageous inequality also emerges from individuals whose preferences underlie perfect substitutability towards those whose preferences are based on complementarity.

Cette thèse étudie le rôle des émotions morales dans le choix des agents lorsqu’ils font face à undilemme social. Lors des deux premiers chapitres, nous présentons une revue de littérature étendue, quimobilise des recherches en économie expérimentale, psychologie sociale et gestion des organisations, afin decerner comment les émotions morales, et en particulier la gratitude, influent sur la prise de décision des agentséconomiques. Dans le troisième chapitre, nous nous intéressons, à travers une revue des travaux en économiecomportementale, à l’intégration progressive du rôle des émotions dans les modèles économiques. Nousmontrons ainsi en quoi cette intégration, concomitante à l’apparition des modèles dits de « préférencessociales », permet de représenter de manière plus réaliste le processus de décision des agents, dans dessituations où les comportements économiques observés expérimentalement remettent en cause une visionégoïste et matérialiste des êtres humains. Dans le quatrième chapitre, nous présentons en détail le jeu du bienpublic, ainsi que les principaux résultats expérimentaux qui lui sont associés, pour mieux saisir en quoi ilconstitue un cadre propice à l’analyse formelle de l’influence des émotions morales. Enfin, notre travailaboutit, dans les cinquième et sixième chapitres, à l’élaboration d’un modèle original en économiecomportementale, qui vise à analyser comment l’émergence des émotions morales peut influencer, à la fois enstatique et en dynamique, le choix stratégique des individus dans le jeu du bien public et comment l’ajoutd’une phase de récompense peut renforcer la coopération entre les partenaires / This thesis studies the role of moral emotions in the decision making of agents when they face asocial dilemma. The first two chapters present a large literature review, which gathers research inexperimental economics, in social psychology and in the management of organizations, in order to delineatethe way moral emotions, and specifically gratitude, are able to influence the economical decision process. Inthe third chapter, through a review of works in the field of behavioral economics, we take an interest in theprogressive integration of moral emotions into economic modeling. We thus show how this integration, whichis concurrent with the emergence of social preferences models, allows agents' decision-making processes to berepresented in a more realistic way, in situations where the behaviors that are observed empirically challengean egoistic and materialistic vision of people. In chapter four, the public good game is presented in detail,along with the main experimental results associated with it, in order to understand why this game suits theformal analysis of moral emotions' influence. Finally, our work culminates in the development of an originalmodel in behavioral economics, during chapters five and six, which aims at assessing how the emergence ofmoral emotions can influence, both statically and dynamically, the strategic choice of individuals in the publicgood game, and how the introduction of a reward phase can promote cooperation and help individuals todevelop good interpersonal relationships.

BACKGROUND: Today’s societal changes, including high rate of change and increasing information flows, are increasing the demand on the individual mental capacity. It becomes increasingly difficult to analytically process all the different dilemmas and everyday decisions as individuals have a limited mental capacity available to make these decisions. Thus, it has been suggested that ego-depleted relies more heavily on intuition, which is less burdensome, when making decision. However little is known about to what extent intuitive decisions differ from analytic. Are ego-depleted individuals more or less likely to maximize outcome in moral dilemmas involving conflicting values? Do ego depleted individuals become more or less willing to cooperate? Do ego depleted individuals become more or less altruistic? Is our intuition more or less in accordance with Homo Economicus?AIM: Starting from a Dual Process perspective on decision-making the aim of this study is to examine how ego depletion affects moral judgment and pro-social decisions.METHOD: A laboratory experiment involving 115 subjects, using real monetary incentives, was conducted among students at Linköping University. Subjects were randomized into one of two treatments. Everything was identical across treatments except for the initial ego-depletion manipulation. Using a standard paradigm for ego-depletion subjects in treatment 1 were put under high cognitive load while subjects in treatment two were put under low cognitive load. Subjects faced 16 questions divided into four different decision tasks: Moral dilemmas, Public Goods game, two types of Dictator Game where the type of sacrifice subjects could make in order to contribute money to charity was varied.RESULTS: Subjects in the high cognitive load treatment made fewer consequentialists moral judgments compared to other subjects (p = 0.075). The effect is especially strong when looking only at high-conflict dilemmas such as Crying Baby. No difference between treatments was found for the public goods games. In the dictator game involving monetary sacrifice subjects donated less money to charity when put under high cognitive load. However the finding was not significant (p = 0.292). No difference was found in the dictator game involving effort as personal sacrifice since almost everyone chooses to donate to charity.CONCLUSION: According to The Dual Process perspective this essay shows that intuitive thinking does not evidently lead to that they makes decision that more or less is in accordance with Homo Economicus. The connection between ego depletion and pro-social decisions is more complex. Further research needs to investigate which different mental shortcuts that individuals uses in various types of pro-social decisions and why intuitive and analytical decision-making differ between different decisions. Further research within the area can identify potential mechanisms and policies that can support individuals’ capacity to make decisions in accordance with their own and society’s preferences.