The Role of Shame on Adherence to Prosocial Norms

As far as we know, only two theories have been developed that explain why obscuring observability of norm-transgression may lead to an increased prevalence of transgression. Tadelis (2007) proposes a shame-anticipation mechanism, where the utility of a decision maker decreases with the audience¿s belief about the likelihood that he transgressed a norm. Thus, if an outcome that follows norm-transgression could have been the result of a factor other than the decision maker¿s choice, she will be more inclined to transgress. However, in a situation where norm-following is obscured (but not transgression), this theory predicts no change in behavior. Andreoni and Bernheim (2009) propose a signaling mechanism. In their theory, individuals have their own propensity to follow a norm, which is their private information. Utility increases with the audience¿s (inferred) value of that propensity. Obscuring transgression means that the audience will be less able to infer that the decision maker has a low propensity to follow norms and will result in a higher prevalence of transgression. Obscuring norm-abiding behavior means that the audience will be less able to infer that the decision maker has a large propensity to follow norms, making it less attractive to follow norms and resulting in a higher prevalence of transgression. Our experiment can be seen as a ¿horse-race¿ between both theories.