This dissertation discusses two major issues about communication in experimental economics through a detailed analysis of a pirate-game and a public goods game experiment: comparability and measurement of communication. First, in order to draw definite results from different experiments with communication, communication needs to be classified more thoroughly. The dissertation proposes dimensions that can be used for such a classification on a theoretical basis. Second, it is shown empirically how machine learning can advance behavioral economics by extracting information from communication data and predicting subsequent behavior. Possible implications of this technology for politics, economy, and society in general are outlined. Since currently these implications are mostly unexplored, the thesis ultimately calls for behavioral economics to take part in this development rather than to simply wait for it to happen.

This paper tests how capital markets value the international diversification of banks in good and in bad economic times by investigating changes in domestic and foreign sovereign debt ratings before and during the European sovereign debt crisis. Tracing 320 European banks in 29 countries and 226 credit rating announcements for European sovereigns between 1 January 2001 and 15 August 2012, we show that the market values banks with access to foreign funds. Despite occasional adverse effects immediately following negative news regarding sovereign credit rating changes, international diversification was found to be beneficial to European banks, especially during periods of distress.

Previous research finds market financing is favored over relationship financing in environments of better governance, since the transaction costs to investors of vetting asymmetric information are thereby reduced. For industries supplying public goods, for-profits rely on market financing, while nonprofits rely on relationships with donors. This suggests that for-profits will be more inclined than nonprofits to improve financial transparency. We examine the impact of for-profit versus nonprofit status on the financial transparency of firms engaged with supplying public goods. There are relatively few industries that have large number of both for-profit and nonprofit firms across countries. However, the microfinance industry provides the opportunity of a large number of both for-profit and nonprofit firms in relatively equal numbers, across a wide array of countries. Consistent with our prediction, we find that financial transparency is positively associated with a for-profit status. Results will be of broad interest both to scholars interested in the roles of transparency and transaction costs on market versus relational financing; as well as to policy makers interested in the impact of for-profit on the supply of public goods, and on the microfinance industry in particular.

This paper illustrates how audio-visual data from pre-play face-to-face communication can be used to identify groups which contain free-riders in a public goods experiment. It focuses on two channels over which face-to-face communication influences contributions to a public good. Firstly, the contents of the face-to-face communication are investigated by categorising specific strategic information and using simple meta-data. Secondly, a machine-learning approach to analyse facial expressions of the subjects during their communications is implemented. These approaches constitute the first of their kind, analysing content and facial expressions in face-to-face communication aiming to predict the behaviour of the subjects in a public goods game. The analysis shows that verbally mentioning to fully contribute to the public good until the very end and communicating through facial clues reduce the commonly observed end-game behaviour. The length of the face-to-face communication quantified in number of words is further a good measure to predict cooperation behaviour towards the end of the game. The obtained findings provide first insights how a priori available information can be utilised to predict free-riding behaviour in public goods games.

Can a negative shock to sovereign ratings invoke a vicious cycle of increasing government bond yields and further downgrades, ultimately pushing a country toward default? The narratives of public and political discussions, as well as of some widely cited papers, suggest this possibility. In this paper, we will investigate the possible existence of such a vicious cycle. We find no evidence of a bad long-run equilibrium and cannot confirm a feedback loop leading into default as a transitory state for all but the very worst ratings. We use a bivariate semiparametric dynamic panel model to reproduce the joint dynamics of sovereign ratings and government bond yields. The individual equations resemble Pesaran-type cointegration models, which allow for valid interference regardless of whether the employed variables display unit-root behavior. To incorporate most of the empirical features previously documented (separately) in the literature, we allow for different long-run relationships in both equations, nonlinearities in the level effects of ratings, and asymmetric effects in changes of ratings and yields. Our finding of a single good equilibrium implies the slow convergence of ratings and yields toward this equilibrium. However, the persistence of ratings is sufficiently high that a rating shock can have substantial costs if it occurs at a highly speculative rating or lower. Rating shocks that drive the rating below this threshold can increase the interest rate sharply, and for a long time. Yet, simulation studies based on our estimations show that it is highly improbable that rating agencies can be made responsible for the most dramatic spikes in interest rates.

Menschen, die über ökonomische Bildung verfügen, reagieren stärker auf wirtschaftliche Anreize. Entgegen der verbreiteten Annahme handeln Ökonomen jedoch nicht egoistischer als Nicht-Ökonomen, wenn es darum geht, gemeinsam ein öffentliches Gut zu finanzieren. Mit Hilfe eines Experiments, in dem die Teilnehmer echtes Geld gewinnen konnten, wird gezeigt, dass Ökonomen sich stärker an den vorliegenden Anreizstrukturen orientieren. Auf der einen Seite tragen Ökonomen am Anfang leicht höher zu dem öffentlichen Gut bei und fangen signifikant später an, von der sozial optimalen Strategie abzuweichen. Auf der anderen Seite leisten Ökonomen zum Ende des Experiments, wenn Trittbrettfahrerverhalten weniger Konsequenzen hat, deutlich geringere Beiträge als Nicht-Ökonomen. Im zweiten Teil des Experiments wird den Teilnehmenden die Möglichkeit gegeben, in eine Erleichterung der kooperativen Finanzierung des öffentlichen Guts zu investieren, wobei zwischen einem investitionsfreundlichen (Geld-zurück-Garantie) und einem weniger investitionsfreundlichen Szenario (keine Garantie) unterschieden wird. Das Experiment zeigt, dass die Probanden mit ökonomischer Ausbildung auf diesen kleinen Unterschied in den Anreizstrukturen stärker reagieren.

In a public good experiment, the paper analyses to which extent individuals with economic education behave differently in a second-order dilemma. Second-order dilemmas may arise, when individuals endogenously build up costly institutions that help to overcome a public good problem (first-order dilemma). The specific institution used in the experiment is a communication platform allowing for group communication before the first-order public good game takes place. The experimental results confirm the finding of the literature that economists tend to free ride more intensively in public good games than non-economists. The difference is the strongest in the end-game phase, yielding in the conclusion that the magnitude of the end-game effect depends on the share of economists in the pool of participants. When it comes to the building-up of institutions, the individual efficiency gain of the institution and its inherent cost function constitute the driving forces for the contribution behaviour. Providing an investment friendly environment yields in economists contributing more to the institution than non-economists. Therefore, we make clear that first-order results of a simple public good game cannot be simply applied for second-order incentive problems.

In this paper, we study the domestic political determinants of military spending. Our conceptual framework suggests that power distribution over local and central governments influences the government provision of national public goods, in our context, military expenditure. Drawing on a large cross-country panel, we demonstrate that having local elections will decrease a country’s military expenditure markedly, controlling for other political and economic variables. According to our preferred estimates, a country’s military expenditure is on average 20% lower if its state government officials are locally elected, which is consistent with our theoretical prediction.