Table B-4.

Impact of Health Shocks on Survey Social Preferences

Explanatory variable	Dependent variable	Correlation coefficient	Regression coefficient	# Obs.
	Outcome in 2007
days sick 2007	trust people in the world	−0.056	−0.002 (0.002) [0.390]	123
	trust people in the village	0.072	0.004 (0.003) [0.114]	123
	trust closest neighbor	−0.061	−0.001 (0.004) [0.796]	123
	bad to buy something you know is stolen	−0.015	−0.000 (0.001) [0.756]	123
	would villagemates take advantage if had opportunity	0.049	0.002 (0.002) [0.261]	123
	Outcome in 2009
days sick 2009	trust people in the world	−0.111	−0.006 (0.007)	49
	trust people in the village	0.173	0.007 (0.005)	49
	trust closest neighbor	0.109	0.004 (0.004)	49
	bad to buy something you know is stolen	0.217	0.002 (0.002)	49
	would villagemates take advantage if had opportunity	−0.219	−0.009** (0.004)	49
	negative reciprocity	−0.004	−0.000 (0.002)	49

Notes: Heteroskedasticity robust standard errors are in parentheses. Wild cluster bootrap p-values are in brackets.

Per-comparison significance: ***p <0.01,

^**p <0.05,

^*p <0.10.

FDR q-values: +++ q <0.01,

⁺⁺q <0.05,

⁺q <0.10 calculated for 5 or 6 hypotheses within table and column and panel.

In regression column these are based on the heteroskedasticity robust standard errors. Controls in regressions include log income, sex, age, education, number of non-disabled people in the household aged 11–74, and village fixed effects. Days sick - number of days non-disabled people in the household aged 11–74 couldn’t work due to illness. Each regression additionally controls for social preferences in the previous round. In the first panel, the 2002 version of the 2007 outcome variable is included as a control variable. In the second panel, the 2007 version of the 2009 outcome is included as a control variable