Measuring Norms: A Comparison of the Predictive and Descriptive Power of Three Methods

Francesco Bogliacino, Diego Aycinena and Erik Kimbrough
Additional contact information
Diego Aycinena: Universidad del Rosario

No djfw5, SocArXiv from Center for Open Science

Abstract: We analyze and compare three methods of measuring norms: the Krupka and Weber (KW) coordination game, the two-step approach by Bicchieri and Xiao (BX), and a novel Binarized Scoring Method (BSM) we introduce that elicits the full distribution of normative beliefs. We test their effectiveness in two distinctive ways. First, we compare the fit and predictive power of the norms elicited by each method in 3 versions of the dictator game, which differ in how the pie is initially allocated. Then we use vignettes to assess the extent to which the methods can recover existing norms for various naturally occurring settings. We find that the KW method yields better predictive power within a norm-dependent utility model. All 3 methods effectively recover norms in field settings, although KW is more robust to false positives.

Date: 2023-12-15
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-gth, nep-soc and nep-upt
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://osf.io/download/657c36584a0e9007798e90ce/

Related works:
Working Paper: Measuring Norms: A Comparison of the Predictive and Descriptive Power of Three Methods (2023)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:osf:socarx:djfw5

DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/djfw5

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in SocArXiv from Center for Open Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by OSF ().