The Role of Communication of Performance Schemes: Evidence from a Field Experiment

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2016.2559

References

  • Al-Ubaydli O, List JA (2012) On the generalizability of experimental results in economics. Frechette G, Schotter A, eds. Handbook of Experimental Economic Methodology, Chap. 20, (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK), 420–462.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Al-Ubaydli O, List JA (2013) On the generalizability of experimental results in economics: With a response to Camerer. NBER Working Paper 19666, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Al-Ubaydli O, Andersen S, Gneezy U, List JA (2015) Carrots that look like sticks: Toward an understanding of multitasking incentive schemes. Southern Econom. J. 81(3):538–561.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Angrist J, Pischke J-S (2009) Mostly Harmless Econometrics (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Bandiera O, Barankay I, Rasul I (2005) Social preferences and the response to incentives: Evidence from personnel data. Quart. J. Econom. 120(3):917–962.Google Scholar
  • Bandiera O, Barankay I, Rasul I (2013) Team incentives: Evidence from a firm level experiment. J. Eur. Econom. Assoc. 11(5):1079–1114.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Barankay I (2012) Rank incentives: Evidence from a field experiment. Working paper, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
  • Bellemare C, Shearer B (2011) On the relevance and composition of gifts within the firm: Evidence from field experiments. Internat. Econom. Rev. 52(3):855–882.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Blanes-i-Vidal J, Nossol M (2011) Tournaments without prizes: Evidence from personnel records. Management Sci. 57(10):1721–1736.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Bordalo P, Gennaioli N, Shleifer A (2012) Salience theory of choice under risk. Quart. J. Econom. 127(3):1243–1285.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Brown J, Hossain T, Morgan J (2010) Shrouded attributes and information suppression: Evidence from the field. Quart. J. Econom. 125(2):859–876.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Cameron C, Gelbach J, Miller D (2008) Bootstrap-based improvements for inference with clustered errors. Rev. Econom. Statist. 90(3):414–427.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Cameron C, Gelbach J, Miller D (2011) Robust inference with multi-way clustering. J. Bus. Econom. Statist. 29(2):238–249.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Charness G, Kuhn P (2010) Lab labor: What can labor economists learn from the lab? Card D, Ashenfelter O, eds. Handbook of Labor Economics, 4th ed. (North-Holland, Amsterdam), 229–330.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Chetty R, Looney A, Kroft K (2009) Salience and taxation: Theory and evidence. Amer. Econom. Rev. 99(4):1145–1177.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Cohn A, Fehr E, Goette L (2016) Fair wages and effort provision: Combining evidence from a choice experiment and a field experiment. Management Sci. 61(8):1777–1794.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • DellaVigna S (2009) Psychology and economics: Evidence from the field. J. Econom. Literature 47(2):315–372.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Dumont E, Fortin B, Jacquemet N, Shearer B (2008) Physicians multitasking and incentives: Empirical evidence from a natural experiment. J. Health Econom. 27(6):1436–1450.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Finkelstein A (2009) EZ-tax: Tax salience and tax rates. Quart. J. Econom. 124(3):969–1010.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Gneezy U, List JA (2006) Putting behavioral economics to work: Testing for gift exchange in labor markets using field experiments. Econometrica 74(5):1365–1384.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Harrison GW, List JA (2004) Field experiments. J. Econom. Literature 42(4):1009–1055.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Holm S (1979) A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scandinavian J. Statist. 6(2):65–70.Google Scholar
  • Holmstrom B, Milgrom P (1991) Multitask principal-agent analyses: Incentive contracts, asset ownership and job design. J. Law, Econom., Organ. 7(Special Issue):24–52.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Hong F, Hossain T, List JA, Tanaka M (2013) Testing the theory of multitasking: Evidence from a natural field experiment in Chinese factories. NBER Working Paper 19660, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Hossain T, List JA (2012) The behavioralist visits the factory: Increasing productivity using simple framing manipulations. Management Sci. 58(12):2151–2167.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Hossain T, Morgan J (2006) …Plus shipping and handling: Revenue (non) equivalence in field experiments on eBay. B.E. J. Econom. Anal. Policy: Adv. Econom. Anal. Policy 5(2):1–27.Google Scholar
  • Ioannidis JP (2005) Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Medicine 2(8):696–701.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Johnson RM, Reiley DH, Munoz JC (2015) “The war for the fare”: How driver compensation affects bus system performance. Econom. Inquiry 53(3):1401–1419.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Karlan D, McConnel M, Mullainathan S, Zinman J (2016) Getting to the top of mind: How reminders increase saving. Management Sci. 62(12):3393–3411.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Kluger A, Denisi A (1996) The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis and a preliminary information intervention theory. Psych. Bull. 119(2):254–284.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Koszegi B, Szeidl A (2013) A model of focusing in economic choice. Quart. J. Econom. 128(1):53–107.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Lacetera N, Pope D, Sydnor J (2012) Heuristic thinking and limited attention in the car market. Amer. Econom. Rev. 105(5):2206–2236.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Lazear E (2000) Performance pay and productivity. Amer. Econom. Rev. 90(5):1346–1361.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Lee Y, Malmendier U (2011) The bidder’s curse. Amer. Econom. Rev. 101(2):749–787.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Levitt S, List JA (2011) Was there really a Hawthorne effect at the Hawthorne plant? An analysis of the original illumination experiments. Amer. Econom. J.: Appl. Econom. 3(1):224–238.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • List JA, Shaikh AM, Xu Y (2016) Multiple hypothesis testing in experimental economics. NBER Working Paper 21875, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Maniadis Z, Tufano F, List JA (2014) One swallow doesn’t make a summer: New evidence on anchoring effects. Amer. Econom. Rev. 104(1):277–290.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Maniadis Z, Tufano F, List JA (2015) How to make experimental economics research more reproducible: Lessons from other disciplines and a new proposal. Res. Experiment. Econom. 18:215–230.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Moonesighe R, Khoury MJ, Janssens ACJ (2007) Most published research findings are false—But a little replication goes a long way. PLoS Medicine 4(2):218–221.Google Scholar
  • Paarsch H, Shearer B (2000) Piece rates, fixed wages and incentives effects: Statistical evidence from payroll records. Internat. Econom. Rev. 41(1):59–92.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Pope D (2009) Reacting to rankings: Evidence from “America’s best hospitals.” J. Health Econom. 28(6):1154–1165.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Prendergast C (1999) The provision of incentives in firms. J. Econom. Literature 37(1):7–63.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Romano JP, Shaikh AM, Wolf M (2010) Hypothesis testing in econometrics. Annual Rev. Econom. 2:75–104.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Shearer B (2004) Piece rates, fixed wages and incentives: Evidence from a field experiment. Rev. Econom. Stud. 71(2):513–534.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Stango V, Zinman J (2014) Limited and varying consumer attention: Evidence from shocks to the salience of bank overdraft fees. Rev. Financial Stud. 27(4):990–1030.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Thompson S (2011) Simple formulas for standard errors that cluster by both firm and time. J. Financial Econom. 99(1):1–10.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
INFORMS site uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some are essential to make our site work; Others help us improve the user experience. By using this site, you consent to the placement of these cookies. Please read our Privacy Statement to learn more.