Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Linear Public Goods Experiments: A Meta-Analysis

  • Published:
Experimental Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • American Economics Association. (September 26, 1999). http://www.econlit.org/econlit/ellistjn.html.

  • 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.

    Google 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.

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Solla Price, D. (1981). “The Development and Structure of the Biomedical Literature.” In K. Warren (ed.), Coping with the Biomedical Literature. New York: Praeger Publishers. Cited in E.R. Siegel et. al. (1990). “Bibliographic-Retrieval Systems.” In E.H. Shortliffe, 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.

    Google 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 J. Kagel and A. Roth (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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palfrey, T. and Porter, R. (1991). “Guidelines for Submission of Manuscripts on Experimental Economics.” Econometrica. 59(4), 1197–1198.

    Google 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolf, F.M. (1986). Meta-Analysis: Quantitative Methods for Research Synthesis. Beverly Hills: SAGE Publications.

    Google 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.

    Google 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.

    Google 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.

    Google 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Croson, R.T.A. (1996). “Partners and Strangers Revisited.” Economics Letters. 53(1), 25–32.

    Google 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dorsey, R.E. (1992). “The Voluntary Contributions Mechanism with Real Time Revisions.” Public Choice. 73(3), 261–282.

    Google 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, J., Fehr, 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.

  • Fisher, J. et al. (1995). “Heterogeneous Demand for Public Goods: Behavior in the Voluntary Contributions Mechanism.” Public Choice. 85(3/4), 249–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gächter, S., Fehr, E., and Kment, C. (1996). “Does Social Exchange Increase Voluntary Cooperation?” Kyklos. 49(4), 541–554.

    Google 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.

  • Harbaugh, W.T. and Krause, K. (2000). “Children's Altruism in Public Good and Dictator Experiments.” Economic Inquiry. 38(1), 95–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Isaac, R.M. and Walker, J.M. (1988a). “Communication and Free-Riding Behavior: The Voluntary Contribution Mechanism.” Economic Inquiry. 26(4), 585–608.

    Google 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.

    Google 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.

    Google 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.

    Google 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.

    Google 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCorkle, S. and Watts, M. (1996). “Free Riding Indexes for Ukrainian Economics Teachers.” Journal of Economic Education. 27(3), 233–237.

    Google 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.

    Google 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saijo, T. and Nakamura, H. (1995). “The ‘spite’ Dilemma in Voluntary Contribution Mechanism Experiments.” Journal of Conflict Resolution. 39(3), 535–560.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weimann, J. (1994). “Individual Behavior in a Free-Riding Experiment.” Journal of Public Economics. 54(1), 1–36.

    Google 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

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

    Jennifer Zelmer (Graduate Student)

Authors
  1. Jennifer Zelmer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zelmer, J. Linear Public Goods Experiments: A Meta-Analysis. Experimental Economics 6, 299–310 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026277420119

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026277420119

Search

Navigation