Abstract
AbstractIn recent years, experimental economics has seen a rise in the collection and analysis of choice-process data, such as team communication transcripts. The main purpose of this paper is to understand whether the collection of team communication data influences how individuals reason and behave as they enter the team deliberation process, i.e. before any communication exchange. Such an influence would imply that team setups have limited validity to speak to individual reasoning processes. Our treatment manipulations allow us to isolate the effects of (1) belonging to a team, (2) actively suggesting an action to the team partner, and (3) justifying the suggestion in a written text to the team partner. Across three different tasks, we find no systematic evidence of changed suggestions and altered individual sophistication due to changes in aspects (1)–(3) of our experimental design. We thus find no threat to said validity of team setups. In addition to investigating how the team setup affects individual behavior before communication, we also investigate the sophistication of decisions after the communication. We find that sophisticated strategies are more persuasive than unsophisticated strategies, especially when communication includes written justifications, thereby explaining why teams are more sophisticated and proving rich communication to be fruitful.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Economics, Econometrics and Finance (miscellaneous)
Reference75 articles.
1. Arad, A., & Penczynski, S. P. (2021). “Multi-dimensional reasoning in competitive resource allocation games: Evidence from Intra-team communication,” Technical Report .
2. Arad, A., & Rubinstein, A. (2012). Multi-dimensional iterative reasoning in action: The case of the colonel blotto game. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 84(2), 571–585.
3. Arkes, H. R., Kagel, J. H., & Mezhvinsky, D. (2017). Effects of a management-labor context and team play on ultimatum game outcomes. Southern Economic Journal, 83(4), 993–1011.
4. Bauer, M., Cahlíková, J., Katreniak, D., Celik, Chytilová, J., Cingl, L., Zelinsky, T. (2018) “Anti-social behavior in groups,” CERGE-EI working paper series, (632)
5. Besedeš, T., Deck, C., Quintanar, S., Sarangi, S., & Shor, M. (2014). Effort and performance: What distinguishes interacting and noninteracting groups from individuals? Southern Economic Journal, 81(2), 294–322.
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献