Reciprocity in Multiple Principals - Agent Interactions: Experimental Evidence

J. Schmitz
{"title":"Reciprocity in Multiple Principals - Agent Interactions: Experimental Evidence","authors":"J. Schmitz","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3913976","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Agents frequently interact with multiple principals at the same time. An employee may have multiple supervisors, firms may engage in public-private partnerships or firms and individuals may borrow from multiple banks/peers. Digitalization further fuels the possibilities to simultaneously engage in economic transactions with multiple others around the globe (e.g., FinTechs offering financial advice or brokerage). This paper provides experimental evidence on reciprocity in interactions between multiple principals and one agent. In the experiments, one agent interacted with either one or multiple principals and needed to decide whether or not to reciprocate trust. An increase in the number of principals who trusted significantly undermined reciprocity. Principals, however, did not anticipate the decrease in reciprocity. Compared with bilateral principal - agent interactions, trust increased if principals had the possibility to pool risk. Observational field data from 113,000 loans funded by a varying number of investors on a crowdlending platform provides suggestive empirical evidence supporting the experimental results on reciprocity. The propensity of loan default is associated with the number of investors providing the credit. Situations in which multiple principals interact with a single agent may be considerably more risky compared to bilateral interactions. These findings have important implications for understanding, designing and structuring interactions in which multiple principals are involved.","PeriodicalId":8731,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral & Experimental Finance eJournal","volume":"13 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavioral & Experimental Finance eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3913976","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Agents frequently interact with multiple principals at the same time. An employee may have multiple supervisors, firms may engage in public-private partnerships or firms and individuals may borrow from multiple banks/peers. Digitalization further fuels the possibilities to simultaneously engage in economic transactions with multiple others around the globe (e.g., FinTechs offering financial advice or brokerage). This paper provides experimental evidence on reciprocity in interactions between multiple principals and one agent. In the experiments, one agent interacted with either one or multiple principals and needed to decide whether or not to reciprocate trust. An increase in the number of principals who trusted significantly undermined reciprocity. Principals, however, did not anticipate the decrease in reciprocity. Compared with bilateral principal - agent interactions, trust increased if principals had the possibility to pool risk. Observational field data from 113,000 loans funded by a varying number of investors on a crowdlending platform provides suggestive empirical evidence supporting the experimental results on reciprocity. The propensity of loan default is associated with the number of investors providing the credit. Situations in which multiple principals interact with a single agent may be considerably more risky compared to bilateral interactions. These findings have important implications for understanding, designing and structuring interactions in which multiple principals are involved.
多主体中的互惠——代理交互:实验证据
代理经常同时与多个主体交互。一名雇员可能有多个主管,企业可能参与公私合作,或者企业和个人可能向多家银行/同行借款。数字化进一步推动了同时与全球多个其他人进行经济交易的可能性(例如,提供金融咨询或经纪服务的金融科技公司)。本文提供了多个主体和一个代理之间交互中的互惠性的实验证据。在实验中,一个代理与一个或多个主体进行交互,并需要决定是否回报信任。信任的委托人数量的增加大大破坏了互惠性。然而,校长们没有预料到互惠会减少。与双边委托代理互动相比,如果委托人有可能分担风险,信任会增加。在一个众筹平台上,由不同数量的投资者资助的113,000笔贷款的现场观测数据为互惠的实验结果提供了暗示性的经验证据。贷款违约倾向与提供信贷的投资者数量有关。与双边交互相比,多个主体与单个代理交互的情况可能风险更大。这些发现对于理解、设计和构建涉及多个主体的交互具有重要意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信