Abstract

Do economics students behave more selfishly than other students? Experiments involving monetary allocations suggest so. This article investigates the underlying motives for the economic students’ more selfish behavior by separating three potential explanatory mechanisms: economics students are less concerned with fairness when making allocation decisions; have a different notion of what is fair in allocations; or are more skeptical about other people’s allocations, which in turn makes them less willing to comply with a shared fairness norm. The three mechanisms were tested by inviting students from various disciplines to participate in a relatively novel experimental game and asking all participants to give reasons for their choices. Compared with students of other disciplines, economics students were about equally likely to mention fairness in their comments; had a similar notion of what was fair in the situation; however, they expected lower offers, made lower offers, and were less willing to enforce compliance with a fair allocation at a cost to themselves. The economics students’ lower expectations mediated their allocation decisions, suggesting that economics students behaved more selfishly because they expected others not to comply with the shared fairness norm.

Highlights

  • Economists seem to have never enjoyed a good reputation among their peers

  • The results suggest that, relative to their fellow students, economics students are about likely to be concerned with fairness when making decisions; they have a similar notion of what is fair; but their greater skepticism about others’ behavior mediates their more selfish behavior

  • A prerequisite for further analyses was that the third-party punishment game would replicate that economics students behave more selfishly

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Economists seem to have never enjoyed a good reputation among their peers. In 1849, historian Thomas Carlyle described economics as “the dismal science” [1]. Economist Francis Walker felt compelled to explain why economists “tend to be in bad odor amongst real people” [2]. In 1945, psychoanalyst Donald Winnicott denounced economics as the “science of Greed” [3]. Rather than working in the realm of speculation, researchers have sought to determine whether there is a sound empirical basis for economists’ bad reputation. The results of experiments showing links between economic training and more selfish choices have lent firm support to the critics of the discipline: Economics students have been found to behave more selfishly than other populations across various situations involving monetary allocations [4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call