Ivo Windrich

Mr. Ivo Windrich


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

9Years (2018-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
5 October 2018 in Games
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
TNThomas Neumann
Thomas Neumann
SKSabrina Kierspel
Sabrina Kierspel
IWIvo Windrich
Ivo Windrich
RBRoger Berger
Roger Berger
BVBodo Vogt
Bodo Vogt
Previous research has typically focused on distribution problems that emerge in the domain of gains. Only a few studies have distinguished between games played in the domain of gains from games in the domain of losses, even though, for example, prospect theory predicts differences between behavior in both domains. In this study, we experimentally analyze players’ behavior in dictator and ultimatum games when they need to divide a monetary loss and then compare this to behavior when players have to divide a monetary gain. We find that players treat gains and losses differently in that they are less generous in games over losses and react differently to prior experiences. Players in the dictator game become more selfish after they have had the experience of playing an ultimatum game first.

5 January 2024 in Behavioral Sciences
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
IWIvo Windrich
Ivo Windrich
SKSabrina Kierspel
Sabrina Kierspel
TNThomas Neumann
Thomas Neumann
RBRoger Berger
Roger Berger
BVBodo Vogt
Bodo Vogt
Although in everyday life decisions about losses are prevalent (e.g., the climate crisis and the COVID-19 crisis), there is hardly any research on decisions in the loss domain. Therefore, we conducted online experiments with a sample of 672 participants (mostly students), using third-party punishment dictator games (DGs) in the loss domain to explore the impact of losses and punishment threats on the conformity to the fairness norm. Subjects in the treatment condition have to divide a loss of −10 € with the threat of a third-party punishment with different strengths (control: gains, no punishment). Overall, the statistical evidence seems rather weak, but when it comes to losses, subjects are more rational and straightforward with their words and deeds than with gains. Therefore, in the loss domain, subjects are more likely to believe that the fairness norm should be followed, and they subjectively perceive that the others do as well. Furthermore, although dictators’ decisions are more selfish in the loss domain, dictators there react more strongly to the punishment threat by reducing their demands than in the gains domain. This holds as long as the punishment threat is strong enough, as judged from a rational perspective.

26 August 2022 in Frontiers in Sociology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
IWIvo Windrich
Ivo Windrich
SKSabrina Kierspel
Sabrina Kierspel
TNThomas Neumann
Thomas Neumann
RBRoger Berger
Roger Berger
BVBodo Vogt
Bodo Vogt
We conducted experiments on norm focusing. The tests were carried out with two versions of dictator games: in one version of the game, the dictator had to allocate a gain of €10, while in the other version, a loss of €−10 needs to be allocated. In a first treatment, we focused subjects on the average giving in similar previous dictator games. The second treatment focused subjects on the behaviour of what a self-interested actor should do. In total, N = 550 participants took part in our experiments. We found (1) a significant difference in giving behaviour between gain and loss treatments, with subjects being moderately more self-interested in the loss domain, (2) a significant effect of focusing subjects on the average behaviour of others, but (3) no effect of focusing subjects on the behaviour of self-interested actors.