scholarly journals Conducting large, repeated, multi-game economic experiments using mobile platforms

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. e0250668
Author(s):  
Zhi Li ◽  
Po-Hsuan Lin ◽  
Si-Yuan Kong ◽  
Dongwu Wang ◽  
John Duffy
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Experimental Economics ◽  
Small Groups ◽  
Laboratory Experiments ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Live Streaming ◽  
Proof Of Concept ◽  
Mobile Platforms ◽  
Economic Decision Making ◽  
Specific Order

We demonstrate the possibility of conducting synchronous, repeated, multi-game economic decision-making experiments with hundreds of subjects in-person or remotely with live streaming using entirely mobile platforms. Our experiment provides important proof-of-concept that such experiments are not only possible, but yield recognizable results as well as new insights, blurring the line between laboratory and field experiments. Specifically, our findings from 8 different experimental economics games and tasks replicate existing results from traditional laboratory experiments despite the fact that subjects play those games/task in a specific order and regardless of whether the experiment was conducted in person or remotely. We further leverage our large subject population to study the effect of large (N = 100) versus small (N = 10) group sizes on behavior in three of the scalable games that we study. While our results are largely consistent with existing findings for small groups, increases in group size are shown to matter for the robustness of those findings.

scholarly journals Lab-in-the-field experiments: perspectives from research on gender

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lata Gangadharan ◽  
Tarun Jain ◽  
Pushkar Maitra ◽  
Joe Vecci
Keyword(s):  
Gender Differences ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Laboratory Experiments ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Diverse Population ◽  
Natural Experiments ◽  
Gender And Leadership ◽  
Lab Experiments ◽  
Randomised Control Trials

AbstractThis paper highlights the contributions made by lab-in-the-field experiments, which are also known as artefactual, framed and extra-lab experiments. We present a curated sample of lab-in-the-field experiments and discuss how they can be conducted on their own or combined with conventional laboratory experiments, natural experiments, randomised control trials and surveys to provide unique insights into the behaviour of a diverse population. Using our recent research on gender and leadership, we demonstrate how lab-in-the-field experiments have offered new perspectives about gender differences in decision-making. Finally, we outline the ethical and implementational challenges researchers may face while conducting these experiments and share some of the strategies we employed to address them.

scholarly journals Do we need a second engine for Entrepreneurship? How well defined is intrapreneurship to handle challenges during COVID-19?

2021 ◽  
Vol 120 ◽  
pp. 02022
Author(s):  
Mehmet Kiziloglu ◽  
Samrat Ray
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Cognitive Biases ◽  
National Level ◽  
Subsequent Development ◽  
Extensive Literature ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Economics Of Scale ◽  
Economic Decision Making ◽  
Innovative Thinking

Changing domains of economic mobility has brought in perspectives of innovation which are quite different from the earlier traditions in the so-called readings of Schumpeterian ways of innovative thinking. The new pandemic has taught us lessons that multidisciplinary innovation is not constrained to some mystical black box of innovation but should be elastic and accessible based on necessity and choices. Human beings are not always rational. Cognitive biases and nudges arising out of crisis globally has shown behavioral functionalities which changes the way human beings react and succumb to decision-making. This particular paper is based on extensive literature reviews and global cases arising out of extregencies and the subsequent development of field experiments which study the effects of various factors on innovation within the company. The filed experiments conducted were at national level in cooperation with national chamber of commerce wherein both intrinsic and extrinsic values of economics of scale was studied statistically using advanced techniques to not only analyze the results but infer on earlier research gaps in factors influencing the innovation blackbox of intrapreneurship which takes into account the psychology of economic decision making inside the corporate bandwagon. The rational choice behind measuring intrapreneurship in this study is impactful for learning the trends of human actions and behavior in a firm, which can be a yardstick for future academicians and policymakers to implement directly for aggravating the incubation indices.

Laboratory Versus Field Experiments in Political Decision Making Research

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron Hoffman
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Political Science ◽  
Human Behavior ◽  
Laboratory Experiments ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Political Decision ◽  
Causal Inferences ◽  
Laboratory Results ◽  
The Many ◽  
Political Decision Making

It can be difficult for political scientists and economists to know when to use laboratory experiments in their research programs. There are longstanding concerns in economics and political science about the external invalidity of laboratory results. Making matters worse, a number of prominent academics recommend using field experiments instead of laboratory experiments to learn about human behavior because field experiments do not have the same external invalidity problems that plague laboratory experiments. The criticisms of laboratory experiments as externally invalid, however, overlook the many advantages of laboratory experiments that derive from their external invalidity. Laboratory experiments are preferable to field experiments at examining hypothetical scenarios (e.g., When automated vehicles dominate the roadways, what principles do people want their automobiles to rely on?), at minimizing erroneous causal inferences (e.g., Did a treatment produce the reaction researchers are studying?), and at replicating and extending previous studies. Rather than being a technique that should be abandoned in favor of field experiments, political scientists and economists should embrace laboratory experiments when testing theoretically important but empirically unusual scenarios, tracing experimental processes, and reproducing and building on prior experiments.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document