Claims regarding negative strong reciprocity do indeed rest on experiments lacking established external validity, often without even a small "menu of options." Guala's review should prompt strong reciprocity proponents to extend the real-world validity of their work, exploring the preferences participants bring to experiments. That said, Guala's approach fails to differentiate among group selection approaches and glosses over cross-cultural variability.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X11001294 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!