| Abstract: |
Experimental evidence has convincingly shown the existence of reciprocal
inclinations, i.e., a tendency for people to respond in-kind to hostile or
kind actions. Little is known, however, about: (i) the prevalence of
reciprocity in the population, (ii) individual determinants of reciprocity,
(iii) the correlation between positive and negative inclinations within
person, and (iv) consequences of reciprocal inclinations for wages, subjective
well-being, friendships and other economic and social outcomes. Answering
these questions requires moving out of the lab and using a large and
representative subject pool, which combines information about subjects'
reciprocal inclinations with extensive socioeconomic background information.
In this paper we measure the reciprocal inclinations of 21,000 individuals. We
show that most people state reciprocal inclinations, in particular in terms of
positive reciprocity. However, there is substantial heterogeneity in the
degree of reciprocity, and quite surprisingly, only a weak correlation between
positive and negative reciprocity for an individual. In terms of determinants,
being female, and increasing age, lead to greater positive and less negatively
reciprocal tendencies. Taller people are more positively reciprocal, but
height has no impact on negative reciprocity. The asymmetric impact of these
determinants provides further indication that positive and negative
reciprocity are fundamentally different traits, rather than the outcome of a
single underlying tendency. In terms of economic implications, we provide the
first evidence using a large representative survey that corroborates an
important hypothesis arising from laboratory experiments: Positively
reciprocal workers are in fact paid more, and exert greater effort, on the
job. Moreover, positively reciprocal people are more likely to be employed,
report having more close friends, and have a higher overall level of life
satisfaction. In this sense, Homo Reciprocans - in the positive domain - is in
fact more successful than his or her non-reciprocal fellows. |