Why do people keep their promises? A further investigation

Original Paper
  • 45 Downloads

Abstract

Two rationales have emerged for why individuals keep their promises: (a) an emotional commitment to keep actions and words consistent, a commitment rationale and (b) avoidance of guilt due to not meeting the expectations of the promisee, an expectations rationale. We propose a new dichotomy with clearer distinctions between rationales: (1) an internal consistency rationale, which is the desire to keep actions and words consistent regardless of others’ awareness of the promise and (2) a communication rationale, which captures all aspects of promise keeping that are associated with the promisee having learned of the promise, including but not limited to promisee expectations. Using an experiment that manipulates whether promises are delivered, we find no support for the internal consistency rationale; only delivered promises are relevant. In a second experiment designed to better understand what aspect of promise delivery influences promisor behavior, we manipulate whether the promise is delivered before or after the promisee is able to take a trusting action. We find late-arriving promises are relevant though not as relevant as promises delivered before the promisee chooses whether to take the trusting action. We conclude that implicit contracting does not fully explain promise keeping, because had it done so, late-arriving promises would also be irrelevant.

Keywords

Promises Commitment Expectations Trust game 

JEL Classification

C91 C70 

Supplementary material

10683_2018_9567_MOESM1_ESM.docx (16 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 15 kb)
10683_2018_9567_MOESM2_ESM.docx (16 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (DOCX 15 kb)
10683_2018_9567_MOESM3_ESM.docx (19 kb)
Supplementary material 3 (DOCX 18 kb)
10683_2018_9567_MOESM4_ESM.docx (23 kb)
Supplementary material 4 (DOCX 23 kb)

References

  1. Berg, J., Dickhaut, J., & McCabe, K. (1995). Trust, reciprocity and social history. Games and Economic Behavior, 10(1), 122–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bicchieri, C. (2006). The grammar of society: The nature and dynamics of social norms. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Charness, G., & Dufwenberg, M. (2006). Promises and partnership. Econometrica, 74(6), 1579–1601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Charness, G., & Dufwenberg, M. (2010). Broken promises: An experiment. Economic Letters, 107(2), 281–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Douthit, J., Kearney, L., & Stevens, D. (2012). Can agent cheap talk mitigate agency problems in the presence of a noisy performance measure? An experimental test in a single- and multi-period setting. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 24, 135–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dufwenberg, M., & Gneezy, U. (2000). Measuring beliefs in an experimental lost wallet game. Games and Economic Behavior, 30(2), 163–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ederer, F. & Stremitzer, A. (2016). Promises and expectations. Yale University working paper.Google Scholar
  8. Ellingsen, T., & Johannesson, M. (2004a). Promises, threats and fairness. The Economic Journal, 114(April), 397–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ellingsen, T., & Johannesson, M. (2004b). Is there a hold-up problem? The Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 106(3), 475–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ellingsen, T., Johannesson, M., Tjøtta, S., & Torsvik, G. (2010). Testing guilt aversion. Games and Economic Behavior, 68(1), 95–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hays, W. (1963). Statistics. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  12. Ismayilov, H., & Potters, J. (2016). Why do promises affect trustworthiness, or do they? Experimental Economics, 19(2), 382–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Johnson, N., & Mislin, A. (2011). Trust games: A meta-analysis. Journal of Economic Psychology, 32(5), 865–889.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kawagoe, T., & Narita, Y. (2014). Guilt aversion revisited: An experimental test of a new model. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 102, 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Khalmetski, K., Ockenfels, A., & Werner, P. (2015). Surprising gifts: Theory and laboratory evidence. Journal of Economic Theory, 159, 163–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Klein, D., & O’Flaherty, B. (1993). A game-theoretic rendering of promises and threats. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organizations, 21(3), 295–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lundquist, T., Ellingsen, T., Gribbe, E., & Johannesson, M. (2009). The aversion to lying. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organizations, 70(1–2), 81–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Siegel, S., & Castellan, N. J. (1988). Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  19. Vanberg, C. (2008). Why do people keep their promises? An experimental test of two explanations. Econometrica, 76, 1467–1480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Zizzo, D. (2010). Experiment demand effects in economic experiments. Experimental Economics, 13, 75–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Economic Science Association 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of ManagementBinghamton UniversityBinghamtonUSA
  2. 2.Fisher College of BusinessOhio State UniversityColumbusUSA

Personalised recommendations