A “Dear Economist” correspondent once asked me why people post clips of classic comedies on YouTube, or go to the trouble of writing online reviews, given that there seems to be nothing in it for them. A textbook economics model would say that people would not, in fact, post online reviews or contribute to YouTube. And my answer, in brief, was that they don’t. Far more people read books than write reviews of them, and far more watch YouTube videos than post them. As a broad defence of rational economic man, my answer wasn’t too bad; but as a way of understanding online volunteering, it was useless.
《親愛的經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家》的一位讀者曾經(jīng)寫信問我，為什么看上去無利可圖，還會(huì)有人在YouTube上發(fā)布經(jīng)典的搞笑視頻，或者費(fèi)心在網(wǎng)上撰寫評(píng)論？按照教科書上的經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)模型，人們不應(yīng)該在網(wǎng)上撰寫評(píng)論或者在YouTube上發(fā)布視頻。簡單地說，我的答案是他們并沒有這樣做。讀書的人遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)多于寫評(píng)論的人，看視頻的人也遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)多于上傳視頻的人。作為對(duì)理性經(jīng)濟(jì)人的寬泛辯護(hù)，我的答案還算不錯(cuò)，可惜對(duì)于理解在線志愿行為并沒有幫助。