那也已经不错了。。。 GEB第一，现在JEBO恐怕排不过Experimental economics了吧？

GEB 一般倾向于发一些和博弈论有关的实验文章。 Exp Eco 确实排名上升很快，算是实验经济学的top  JEBO也不错，最近新出了一个review of behavioral economics 估计将来发展势头也应该不错。

我从同学处得到的信息也基本如此，看来专业人员的对这些还是有共识的。

Thank 十步天下 for letting me join in this discussion.

I have to say this paper goes beyond my knowledge, but I'd like to explain some of my views. First, this paper is more social rather than economic, why did the author Dr. Zhang use economic experiment, just as said in the abstract, to study this problem? Second, I suggest Dr. Zhang submits this paper to social science journal rather than economic journal where she may meet trouble for the topic here has few economic issues. Third, the matching of a group of subjects throughout 3 rounds is fixed, so subjects in one group knows each other well, and therefore it is better if reputation effect is explained in the paper. e.g. if all subjects know well about one subject whose math is the best, so the subjects who are in the same group with the math guy would not like to compete with the math guy.  Fourth, in paper it is said that each group consists of 4 subject, but in the Chinese instruction it is said that "我们把每一排同学都分为一个小组". Does this mean each row has 4 students? Fifth, for the 'risk' discussion, it is more precise to name it "uncertainty aversion" or "loss aversion", because risk means the situation in which the probability of losing or winning is known to subject. In round two, however, subjects do not know the probability. Sixth, prospect theory model and laboratory evidences shows that people’s attitude to risk changes according to the change of probability, say risk aversion for small-probability losses and larger-p gains, risk seeking for larger-probability losses and small-probability gains. It is better to explain if you explain this in footnote in your paper. If my view looks childish, just ignore it. If you need more information, welcome to contact me. I’d like to send you relevant papers.