中文摘要：

计划生育政策实行三十多年来,独生子女群体一直备受中国社会关注,并形成了负面的刻板印象。近年来,随着数量庞大的独生子女群体逐渐进入劳动力市场,社会对独生子女群体的刻板印象进一步转化为劳动力市场上所出现的对独生子女的偏见甚至歧视态度。但到底独生子女群体经济行为有何不同？迄今为止,经济学界对此研究甚少。Cameron等（2013）在Science上发表的研究是目前比较独生子女与非独生子女经济偏好和行为的唯一经济学研究。本研究首先对Cameron等（2013）的研究方法及其对所发现结果的可能影响进行了分析,进而在该研究基础上,采用了与之不同的抽样方式,通过对我国不同地区、不同类型的人群开展系列实验,在控制性实验条件下比较独生子女与非独生子女的风险偏好、时间偏好、亲社会的合作行为以及反社会的侵占、报复行为,试图识别在多种行为上两类人群间可能存在的差异。研究通过比较同龄独生子女与非独生子女,有效控制了因年龄差异而可能导致的系统性影响。研究结果表明,独生子女与非独生子女在本研究所涉及的个人独立决策的风险偏好和时间偏好,以及与其他博弈者策略互动中的亲社会行为和反社会行为上均不存在显著差异,并且这一结果在控制其他可能影响因素的多元检验中仍然一致。本研究为独生子女与非独生子女在相关经济行为上的比较,以及如何认识了解独生子女群体提供了新的证据。对独生子女在劳动力市场的偏见需抱有谨慎态度。带着偏见面对劳动力市场上的独生子女会扭曲市场,并影响劳动力市场上的正常公平的竞争秩序。

英文摘要：

The Chinese society has formed a negative stereotype towards the one-child population whom has attracted great attention of the society since the beginning of the 35 - year implementation of the family planning policy. In recent years,as more and more only children become an increasingly important source of labor force in China＇s labor market, the negative stereotype of the society has been further transformed into a prejudice or even a discriminative attitude towards them. How exactly the economic behavior of only children differs from non-only children？ Up to now,only very few studies have ever explored it in economic research. Cameron et al. , （2013） that has been published in the journal Science is the only economic study that compares only children and non-only children in terms of their economic preferences and behavior. In the present study,we first analyze the research approach of Cameron et al. （2013） and the potential influence of their research findings. Besides, by employing a different sampling method, we conduct a series of experiments with different types of participants in well-controlled lab environment in different regions and we compare the possible differences between only children and non-only children in terms of risk preference, time preference, pro-social cooperative behavior and anti-social behavior such as embezzlement and revenge. We have effectively controlled the potential systematic influences due to age differences between different samples. Our results show that no significant behavioral differences have been detected between the two groups of subjects concerning the individual independent decisions such as risk preference and time preferences, as well as strategical interactions with other players in terms of pro-social behavior and anti-social behavior. The results are robust in multivariate tests with control for other possible influential factors. Our findings provide evidences for the comparisons between the two groups of population and shed lights on the deeper un