Experimental Economics

, Volume 11, Issue 4, pp 336–343 | Cite as

Voice matters in a dictator game

  • Tetsuo YamamoriEmail author
  • Kazuhiko Kato
  • Toshiji Kawagoe
  • Akihiko Matsui


We conducted a laboratory experiment to study the effects of communication in a dictator game, while maintaining subjects’ anonymity. In the experiment, the recipient has an opportunity to state a payoff-irrelevant request for his/her share before the dictator dictates his/her offer. We found that the independence hypothesis that voice does not matter is rejected. In particular, if the request is for less than half of the pie, the dictator’s offer increases as the recipient’s request increases. Additionally, there is no dictator who is other-regarding and, at the same time, does not react to the recipient’s request.


Communication Voice Dictator game Economic experiment 


C72 C91 D64 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Supplementary material

10683_2007_9168_MOESM1_ESM.doc (330 kb)
Data Object


  1. Anderberg, M. R. (1973). Cluster analysis for applications. New York: Academic. Google Scholar
  2. Blount, S., & Bazerman, M. (1996). The inconsistent evaluation of absolute versus comparative payoffs in labor supply and bargaining. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 30, 227–240. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bohnet, I., & Frey, B. S. (1999). The sound of silence in prisoner’s dilemma and dictator games. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 38, 43–57. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brandts, J., & Charness, G. (2000). Hot vs. cold: sequential responses and preference stability in experimental games. Experimental Economics, 2, 227–238. Google Scholar
  5. Brosig, J., Weimann, J., & Yang, Ch. L. (2003). The hot versus cold effect in a simple bargaining experiment. Experimental Economics, 6, 75–90. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cason, T. N., & Mui, V. L. (1998). Social influence in the sequential dictator game. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 42, 248–265. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Crawford, V. P., & Sobel, J. (1982). Strategic information transmission. Econometrica, 50, 1431–1451. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fehr, E., & Rockenbach, B. (2003). Detrimental effects of sanctions on human altruism. Nature, 422, 137–140. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hirschman, A. O. (1970). Exit, voice, and loyalty: responses to decline in firms, organizations, and states. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Google Scholar
  10. Ledyard, J. O. (1995). Public goods: a survey of experimental research. In J. H. Kagel, & A. E. Roth (Eds.), Handbook of experimental economics (pp. 111–194). Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press. Google Scholar
  11. Oxoby, R. J., & McLeish, K. N. (2004). Sequential decision and strategy vector methods in ultimatum bargaining: evidence on the strength of other-regarding behavior. Economics Letters, 84, 399–405. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Roth, A. E. (1995). Bargaining experiments. In J. H. Kagel, & A. E. Roth (Eds.), Handbook of experimental economics (pp. 253–348). Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press. Google Scholar
  13. Siegel, S., & Castellan Jr., N. J. (1988). Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences (2nd edn). New York: McGraw-Hill. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Economic Science Association 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tetsuo Yamamori
    • 1
    Email author
  • Kazuhiko Kato
    • 2
  • Toshiji Kawagoe
    • 3
  • Akihiko Matsui
    • 4
  1. 1.Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, Graduate School of EconomicsUniversity of TokyoTokyoJapan
  2. 2.Faculty of EconomicsAsia UniversityTokyoJapan
  3. 3.Department of Complex SystemsFuture University–HakodateHokkaidoJapan
  4. 4.Faculty of EconomicsUniversity of TokyoTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations