ORCID Profile
0000-0003-2581-883X
Current Organisation
Monash University
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
In Research Link Australia (RLA), "Research Topics" refer to ANZSRC FOR and SEO codes. These topics are either sourced from ANZSRC FOR and SEO codes listed in researchers' related grants or generated by a large language model (LLM) based on their publications.
Public Economics- Publically Provided Goods | Experimental Economics | Applied Economics | Welfare Economics | Microeconomic Theory
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 08-2015
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 30-03-2020
DOI: 10.1093/OEP/GPAA002
Abstract: Research on altruistic behaviour and associated anticipatory beliefs, as well as related gender differences, is limited. Using data from Chowdhury and Jeon, who vary a common show-up fee and incentivize recipients to anticipate the amount given in a dictator game, we find that the show-up fee has a positive effect on dictator-giving for both genders. While female dictators are more generous than males, male recipients anticipate higher amounts than the amount male dictators give. As the show-up fee increases, the female dictators become a more generous social type, whereas males do not show this effect. There is no gender difference in anticipation about dictator social type by the recipients.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 07-2002
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 1987
DOI: 10.1007/BF00125845
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 03-1994
DOI: 10.1007/BF01047760
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 03-2003
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 04-1994
DOI: 10.1007/BF01047916
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 02-1988
DOI: 10.1007/BF00115758
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 2020
DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.3598721
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 2018
DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.3106194
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 06-1993
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 04-1991
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 06-1990
DOI: 10.1007/BF00204946
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 10-2021
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 08-2007
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 10-1996
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 27-06-2017
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 02-2001
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 12-2011
Publisher: Duke University Press
Date: 03-08-2018
DOI: 10.1007/S13524-018-0699-Y
Abstract: Parental bias toward children of a particular gender has been widely observed in many societies. Such bias could be due to pure gender preference or differences in earning opportunities and concern for old-age support. We conduct a high-stakes allocation task (subjects allocate the equivalent of one day’s wages between male and female school-aged students) in rural Bangladesh to examine parental attitudes toward male and female children. Parents, either jointly or in idually, allocated freely or restricted endowments for the benefit of anonymous girls or boys at a nearby school. We examine whether there is any systematic bias among fathers and mothers and, if so, whether such bias differs when they make the decision in idually or jointly. The results suggest (1) bias both for and against boys or girls but no systematic bias by either parent and (2) no significant differences in in idual and joint decisions.
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 12-2015
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 02-2017
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 02-2015
DOI: 10.1111/CAJE.12123
Abstract: We conduct a laboratory experiment to study gender differences in leadership. We strip the concept of leadership down to its most basic elements. Questions of style and evaluations of a leader based on style of leadership adopted are made irrelevant. Our leader is an average player who is distinguished merely by occupying the leadership position. Legitimacy is conferred on the leader by the special information possessed. Followers voluntarily choose whether or not to follow the better‐informed leader. The effectiveness of the leader is reduced to two simple factors: is the leader willing or not to voluntarily place him/herself in a vulnerable position to achieve an outcome beneficial to both the leader and his/her followers? Do followers trust their leaders to make the right choice? We provide experimental evidence that female leaders and followers are more cooperative than the males in most circumstances. Female leaders show a hesitation to lead in mixed‐gender environments with gender signalling in circumstances where followers' refusal to follow can significantly hurt them. The behaviour of the followers is the same toward the leaders regardless of their gender.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 06-2023
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 07-2018
Publisher: Emerald (MCB UP )
Date: 2006
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 11-2005
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 05-2019
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 04-2013
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 10-2009
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 05-2023
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 2020
DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.3557796
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 10-2019
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 10-2022
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 10-2015
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 11-11-2016
DOI: 10.1111/ECIN.12417
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 08-2005
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 08-1996
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 21-10-2021
DOI: 10.1007/S10683-021-09732-9
Abstract: An influential result in the literature on charitable giving is that matching subsidies dominate rebate subsidies in raising funds. We investigate whether this result extends to “unit donation” schemes, a popular alternative form of soliciting donations. There, the donors’ choices are over the number of units of a charitable good to fund at a given unit price, rather than the amount of money to give. Comparing matches and rebates as well as simple discounts on the unit price, we find no evidence of dominance in our online experiment: the three subsidy types are equally effective overall. At a more disaggregated level, rebates lead to a higher likelihood of giving, while matching and discount subsidies lead to larger donations by donors. This suggests that charities using a unit donation scheme enjoy additional degrees of freedom in choosing a subsidy type. Rebates merit additional consideration if the primary goal is to attract donors.
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 12-1989
Publisher: Elsevier
Date: 2008
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 06-06-2016
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 08-03-2008
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 05-2021
Publisher: Elsevier
Date: 2008
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 17-03-2011
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 2018
DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.3248540
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 2023
DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.4366554
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 10-2011
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 10-2008
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 07-1990
DOI: 10.1177/109114219001800304
Abstract: This article offers an empirical test of the fiscal illusion hypothesis. It is argued that, if fiscal illusion increases with the degree of separation in taxing and spending powers, then federal unconditional grants ought to have a greater stimulatory impact on local government spending than state unconditional grants. Data for the 136 counties and cities of Virginia were examined and evidence in support of this hypothesis is provided. Federal grants were found to be the primary source of the stimulatory impact of grants. At the minimum, federal unconditional grants have twice the stimulatory effect as state unconditional grants.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 09-1999
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 08-07-2012
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 10-2008
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 06-2008
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 2010
DOI: 10.1002/MDE.1522
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 06-2021
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 08-04-2011
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 13-11-2012
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 07-2015
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 2020
DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.3703016
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 07-1989
DOI: 10.1007/BF00168014
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 06-2004
Abstract: Although evidence indicates that religious persons are more generous on average than nonreligious persons, little work has been done to determine if this greater generosity is a general pattern or is, rather, specific to church-based institutions. Limited research addresses if, or how, religious and nonreligious givers respond to subsidies. This article uses experimental data to examine differences in the amount and pattern of giving to secular charities in response to subsidies by self-identified religious and nonreligious participants. The results indicate no significant difference in either the amount or pattern of giving or in the response to subsidies by religious and nonreligious participants however, giving by religious participants is significantly more responsive to income changes than giving by nonreligious participants.
Start Date: 2013
End Date: 2015
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded ActivityStart Date: 2014
End Date: 2016
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded ActivityStart Date: 2017
End Date: 2019
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded ActivityStart Date: 2017
End Date: 12-2022
Amount: $388,500.00
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded ActivityStart Date: 06-2013
End Date: 12-2018
Amount: $205,000.00
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded ActivityStart Date: 06-2014
End Date: 12-2019
Amount: $253,000.00
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded Activity