dc.contributor.author | Cappelen, Alexander W. | |
dc.contributor.author | Hole, Astri Drange | |
dc.contributor.author | Sørensen, Erik Ø. | |
dc.contributor.author | Tungodden, Bertil | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2009-09-22T07:58:38Z | |
dc.date.available | 2009-09-22T07:58:38Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2009-07 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 0804-6824 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/11250/163188 | |
dc.description.abstract | In a comment to Cappelen, Hole, Sørensen, and Tungodden (2007b),
Conte and Moffatt (2009) challenge our use of a random utility model
when studying individual choices in a fairness experiment. They propose
an alternative approach, what we call the random behavioral model, and
they show that the choice of modeling strategy has profound implications
for our understanding of the observed behavior. In this note, we discuss
how the two approaches differ, and we show that the random behavioral
model of Conte and Moffatt (2009) fails to fit the data from our fairness experiment. | en |
dc.language.iso | eng | en |
dc.publisher | Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration. Department of Economics | en |
dc.relation.ispartofseries | Discussion paper | en |
dc.relation.ispartofseries | 2009:7 | en |
dc.title | Modeling individual choices in experiments : reply to Conte and Moffatt | en |
dc.type | Working paper | en |
dc.subject.nsi | VDP::Samfunnsvitenskap: 200::Økonomi: 210::Samfunnsøkonomi: 212 | en |