Fairness concerns and social norms on redistributive preferences

Autores
Belaus, Anabel; Reyna, Cecilia; Freidin, Esteban
Año de publicación
2020
Idioma
inglés
Tipo de recurso
documento de conferencia
Estado
versión publicada
Descripción
Introduction. Inequality aversion is a largely inquired phenomenon. Numerous studies show evidence of people’s preference for reducing inequality even at a personal cost and without personal gains involved. Nonetheless, there is also evidence of people’s preference for unequal distributions. When asked about largescale distributions, people favor unequal ones up to a certain level. In fact, a novel series of experimental studies recently found that uninterested third parties preferred to reduce inequality but only if it did not jeopardize the relative position between subjects´ payoffs (rank order; Xie et al., 2017). Authors called this “rank reversal aversion”. However, those experiments focused only on the decision of the third party after the initial distribution was randomly assigned. We aim to examine this effect in light of the substantial literature about fairness perception and deservedness. Specifically, we wonder about the moderating role of fairness perceptions on rank reversal aversion. Many studies show varying fairness considerations and preferences due to allocation mechanisms, such as the acceptance of unfair offers in the Ultimatum Game when randomly generated, in contrast with its rejection if chosen by a person. Also, formally identical situations have been found to generate different beliefs due to changes in their framing. Judgments are not made in a vacuum: according to the available elements and the most salient information, people tend to change their beliefs about what is appropriate in a particular situation, which, in turn, influences preferences and behavioral intentions. Measured by such beliefs, social norms have been found to possess high explanatory power on the variation of preferences and decisions. Goals. In this study, we aim to investigate the effect of information about performance in a real effort task (and therefore, deservingness) which does(not) match the initial random allocation between two subjects, on the redistributive preferences of an uninterested third party. We also want to inquire about the social norms present in those settings. Methodology. We propose an experiment based on the original design of Variant 1 by Xie et al. but with a 3x3 within-subject design in which we vary the type of monetary transference (whether it reduces inequality without reverting the ranking, equalizes payoffs, or reduces inequality and reverts the original ranking) and the information of performance in a real effort task and whether relative performance and relative initial distribution matched or not (i.e., whether the participant that gets the initial higher payoff is the one that performed better in the effort task). Participants play a Disinterested Dictator Game (one participant decides on the payoffs of other two participants) indicating their preference on every possible redistributive scenario (strategy method). Also, an independent group of participants estimate prescriptive and descriptive social norms on each experimental scenario. Redistributive decisions have economic consequences for the participants involved except for the decision-maker, whereas the estimation of social norms is also monetarily incentivized. Results. The experiment will be conducted in June 2019 and ready to be communicated on August 2019 during the AACC meeting. We expect variations on people’s beliefs and preferences as a function of the experimental condition. Specifically, we hypothesize that people will be prone to reverse the ranking when the initial allocation is perceived as unfair due to a mismatch with the performance on the real effort task. Discussion. Preferences over social ranks are potential explanations of low support for redistributive interventions, and may serve to clarify the support and maintenance of inequity. Specifically, the role of deservedness on aversion to alter relative positions could provide clues for understanding why preferences for redistribution vary within contexts, which will help in the design of policies both in micro and macro levels.
Fil: Belaus, Anabel. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Instituto de Investigaciones Psicológicas. - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto de Investigaciones Psicológicas; Argentina
Fil: Reyna, Cecilia. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Instituto de Investigaciones Psicológicas. - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto de Investigaciones Psicológicas; Argentina
Fil: Freidin, Esteban. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Bahía Blanca. Instituto de Investigaciones Económicas y Sociales del Sur. Universidad Nacional del Sur. Departamento de Economía. Instituto de Investigaciones Económicas y Sociales del Sur; Argentina
XVII Reunión Nacional y VI Encuentro Internacional de la Asociación Argentina de Ciencias del Comportamiento
Posadas
Argentina
Asociación Argentina de Ciencias del Comportamiento
Materia
INEQUALITY
REDISTRIBUTION
FAIRNESS
SOCIAL NORMS
Nivel de accesibilidad
acceso abierto
Condiciones de uso
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ar/
Repositorio
CONICET Digital (CONICET)
Institución
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
OAI Identificador
oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/164401

id CONICETDig_9bc926148e01ac19ff75445f5a5fa51c
oai_identifier_str oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/164401
network_acronym_str CONICETDig
repository_id_str 3498
network_name_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
spelling Fairness concerns and social norms on redistributive preferencesBelaus, AnabelReyna, CeciliaFreidin, EstebanINEQUALITYREDISTRIBUTIONFAIRNESSSOCIAL NORMShttps://purl.org/becyt/ford/5.1https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5Introduction. Inequality aversion is a largely inquired phenomenon. Numerous studies show evidence of people’s preference for reducing inequality even at a personal cost and without personal gains involved. Nonetheless, there is also evidence of people’s preference for unequal distributions. When asked about largescale distributions, people favor unequal ones up to a certain level. In fact, a novel series of experimental studies recently found that uninterested third parties preferred to reduce inequality but only if it did not jeopardize the relative position between subjects´ payoffs (rank order; Xie et al., 2017). Authors called this “rank reversal aversion”. However, those experiments focused only on the decision of the third party after the initial distribution was randomly assigned. We aim to examine this effect in light of the substantial literature about fairness perception and deservedness. Specifically, we wonder about the moderating role of fairness perceptions on rank reversal aversion. Many studies show varying fairness considerations and preferences due to allocation mechanisms, such as the acceptance of unfair offers in the Ultimatum Game when randomly generated, in contrast with its rejection if chosen by a person. Also, formally identical situations have been found to generate different beliefs due to changes in their framing. Judgments are not made in a vacuum: according to the available elements and the most salient information, people tend to change their beliefs about what is appropriate in a particular situation, which, in turn, influences preferences and behavioral intentions. Measured by such beliefs, social norms have been found to possess high explanatory power on the variation of preferences and decisions. Goals. In this study, we aim to investigate the effect of information about performance in a real effort task (and therefore, deservingness) which does(not) match the initial random allocation between two subjects, on the redistributive preferences of an uninterested third party. We also want to inquire about the social norms present in those settings. Methodology. We propose an experiment based on the original design of Variant 1 by Xie et al. but with a 3x3 within-subject design in which we vary the type of monetary transference (whether it reduces inequality without reverting the ranking, equalizes payoffs, or reduces inequality and reverts the original ranking) and the information of performance in a real effort task and whether relative performance and relative initial distribution matched or not (i.e., whether the participant that gets the initial higher payoff is the one that performed better in the effort task). Participants play a Disinterested Dictator Game (one participant decides on the payoffs of other two participants) indicating their preference on every possible redistributive scenario (strategy method). Also, an independent group of participants estimate prescriptive and descriptive social norms on each experimental scenario. Redistributive decisions have economic consequences for the participants involved except for the decision-maker, whereas the estimation of social norms is also monetarily incentivized. Results. The experiment will be conducted in June 2019 and ready to be communicated on August 2019 during the AACC meeting. We expect variations on people’s beliefs and preferences as a function of the experimental condition. Specifically, we hypothesize that people will be prone to reverse the ranking when the initial allocation is perceived as unfair due to a mismatch with the performance on the real effort task. Discussion. Preferences over social ranks are potential explanations of low support for redistributive interventions, and may serve to clarify the support and maintenance of inequity. Specifically, the role of deservedness on aversion to alter relative positions could provide clues for understanding why preferences for redistribution vary within contexts, which will help in the design of policies both in micro and macro levels.Fil: Belaus, Anabel. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Instituto de Investigaciones Psicológicas. - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto de Investigaciones Psicológicas; ArgentinaFil: Reyna, Cecilia. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Instituto de Investigaciones Psicológicas. - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto de Investigaciones Psicológicas; ArgentinaFil: Freidin, Esteban. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Bahía Blanca. Instituto de Investigaciones Económicas y Sociales del Sur. Universidad Nacional del Sur. Departamento de Economía. Instituto de Investigaciones Económicas y Sociales del Sur; ArgentinaXVII Reunión Nacional y VI Encuentro Internacional de la Asociación Argentina de Ciencias del ComportamientoPosadasArgentinaAsociación Argentina de Ciencias del ComportamientoUniversidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Psicología2020info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/conferenceObjectReuniónJournalhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_5794info:ar-repo/semantics/documentoDeConferenciaapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/11336/164401Fairness concerns and social norms on redistributive preferences; XVII Reunión Nacional y VI Encuentro Internacional de la Asociación Argentina de Ciencias del Comportamiento; Posadas; Argentina; 2019; 191-1921852-4206CONICET DigitalCONICETenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://revistas.unc.edu.ar/index.php/racc/issue/view/2105/327Nacionalinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ar/reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas2025-09-29T10:39:37Zoai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/164401instacron:CONICETInstitucionalhttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/oai/requestdasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:34982025-09-29 10:39:37.988CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicasfalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Fairness concerns and social norms on redistributive preferences
title Fairness concerns and social norms on redistributive preferences
spellingShingle Fairness concerns and social norms on redistributive preferences
Belaus, Anabel
INEQUALITY
REDISTRIBUTION
FAIRNESS
SOCIAL NORMS
title_short Fairness concerns and social norms on redistributive preferences
title_full Fairness concerns and social norms on redistributive preferences
title_fullStr Fairness concerns and social norms on redistributive preferences
title_full_unstemmed Fairness concerns and social norms on redistributive preferences
title_sort Fairness concerns and social norms on redistributive preferences
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Belaus, Anabel
Reyna, Cecilia
Freidin, Esteban
author Belaus, Anabel
author_facet Belaus, Anabel
Reyna, Cecilia
Freidin, Esteban
author_role author
author2 Reyna, Cecilia
Freidin, Esteban
author2_role author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv INEQUALITY
REDISTRIBUTION
FAIRNESS
SOCIAL NORMS
topic INEQUALITY
REDISTRIBUTION
FAIRNESS
SOCIAL NORMS
purl_subject.fl_str_mv https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5.1
https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv Introduction. Inequality aversion is a largely inquired phenomenon. Numerous studies show evidence of people’s preference for reducing inequality even at a personal cost and without personal gains involved. Nonetheless, there is also evidence of people’s preference for unequal distributions. When asked about largescale distributions, people favor unequal ones up to a certain level. In fact, a novel series of experimental studies recently found that uninterested third parties preferred to reduce inequality but only if it did not jeopardize the relative position between subjects´ payoffs (rank order; Xie et al., 2017). Authors called this “rank reversal aversion”. However, those experiments focused only on the decision of the third party after the initial distribution was randomly assigned. We aim to examine this effect in light of the substantial literature about fairness perception and deservedness. Specifically, we wonder about the moderating role of fairness perceptions on rank reversal aversion. Many studies show varying fairness considerations and preferences due to allocation mechanisms, such as the acceptance of unfair offers in the Ultimatum Game when randomly generated, in contrast with its rejection if chosen by a person. Also, formally identical situations have been found to generate different beliefs due to changes in their framing. Judgments are not made in a vacuum: according to the available elements and the most salient information, people tend to change their beliefs about what is appropriate in a particular situation, which, in turn, influences preferences and behavioral intentions. Measured by such beliefs, social norms have been found to possess high explanatory power on the variation of preferences and decisions. Goals. In this study, we aim to investigate the effect of information about performance in a real effort task (and therefore, deservingness) which does(not) match the initial random allocation between two subjects, on the redistributive preferences of an uninterested third party. We also want to inquire about the social norms present in those settings. Methodology. We propose an experiment based on the original design of Variant 1 by Xie et al. but with a 3x3 within-subject design in which we vary the type of monetary transference (whether it reduces inequality without reverting the ranking, equalizes payoffs, or reduces inequality and reverts the original ranking) and the information of performance in a real effort task and whether relative performance and relative initial distribution matched or not (i.e., whether the participant that gets the initial higher payoff is the one that performed better in the effort task). Participants play a Disinterested Dictator Game (one participant decides on the payoffs of other two participants) indicating their preference on every possible redistributive scenario (strategy method). Also, an independent group of participants estimate prescriptive and descriptive social norms on each experimental scenario. Redistributive decisions have economic consequences for the participants involved except for the decision-maker, whereas the estimation of social norms is also monetarily incentivized. Results. The experiment will be conducted in June 2019 and ready to be communicated on August 2019 during the AACC meeting. We expect variations on people’s beliefs and preferences as a function of the experimental condition. Specifically, we hypothesize that people will be prone to reverse the ranking when the initial allocation is perceived as unfair due to a mismatch with the performance on the real effort task. Discussion. Preferences over social ranks are potential explanations of low support for redistributive interventions, and may serve to clarify the support and maintenance of inequity. Specifically, the role of deservedness on aversion to alter relative positions could provide clues for understanding why preferences for redistribution vary within contexts, which will help in the design of policies both in micro and macro levels.
Fil: Belaus, Anabel. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Instituto de Investigaciones Psicológicas. - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto de Investigaciones Psicológicas; Argentina
Fil: Reyna, Cecilia. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Instituto de Investigaciones Psicológicas. - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto de Investigaciones Psicológicas; Argentina
Fil: Freidin, Esteban. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Bahía Blanca. Instituto de Investigaciones Económicas y Sociales del Sur. Universidad Nacional del Sur. Departamento de Economía. Instituto de Investigaciones Económicas y Sociales del Sur; Argentina
XVII Reunión Nacional y VI Encuentro Internacional de la Asociación Argentina de Ciencias del Comportamiento
Posadas
Argentina
Asociación Argentina de Ciencias del Comportamiento
description Introduction. Inequality aversion is a largely inquired phenomenon. Numerous studies show evidence of people’s preference for reducing inequality even at a personal cost and without personal gains involved. Nonetheless, there is also evidence of people’s preference for unequal distributions. When asked about largescale distributions, people favor unequal ones up to a certain level. In fact, a novel series of experimental studies recently found that uninterested third parties preferred to reduce inequality but only if it did not jeopardize the relative position between subjects´ payoffs (rank order; Xie et al., 2017). Authors called this “rank reversal aversion”. However, those experiments focused only on the decision of the third party after the initial distribution was randomly assigned. We aim to examine this effect in light of the substantial literature about fairness perception and deservedness. Specifically, we wonder about the moderating role of fairness perceptions on rank reversal aversion. Many studies show varying fairness considerations and preferences due to allocation mechanisms, such as the acceptance of unfair offers in the Ultimatum Game when randomly generated, in contrast with its rejection if chosen by a person. Also, formally identical situations have been found to generate different beliefs due to changes in their framing. Judgments are not made in a vacuum: according to the available elements and the most salient information, people tend to change their beliefs about what is appropriate in a particular situation, which, in turn, influences preferences and behavioral intentions. Measured by such beliefs, social norms have been found to possess high explanatory power on the variation of preferences and decisions. Goals. In this study, we aim to investigate the effect of information about performance in a real effort task (and therefore, deservingness) which does(not) match the initial random allocation between two subjects, on the redistributive preferences of an uninterested third party. We also want to inquire about the social norms present in those settings. Methodology. We propose an experiment based on the original design of Variant 1 by Xie et al. but with a 3x3 within-subject design in which we vary the type of monetary transference (whether it reduces inequality without reverting the ranking, equalizes payoffs, or reduces inequality and reverts the original ranking) and the information of performance in a real effort task and whether relative performance and relative initial distribution matched or not (i.e., whether the participant that gets the initial higher payoff is the one that performed better in the effort task). Participants play a Disinterested Dictator Game (one participant decides on the payoffs of other two participants) indicating their preference on every possible redistributive scenario (strategy method). Also, an independent group of participants estimate prescriptive and descriptive social norms on each experimental scenario. Redistributive decisions have economic consequences for the participants involved except for the decision-maker, whereas the estimation of social norms is also monetarily incentivized. Results. The experiment will be conducted in June 2019 and ready to be communicated on August 2019 during the AACC meeting. We expect variations on people’s beliefs and preferences as a function of the experimental condition. Specifically, we hypothesize that people will be prone to reverse the ranking when the initial allocation is perceived as unfair due to a mismatch with the performance on the real effort task. Discussion. Preferences over social ranks are potential explanations of low support for redistributive interventions, and may serve to clarify the support and maintenance of inequity. Specifically, the role of deservedness on aversion to alter relative positions could provide clues for understanding why preferences for redistribution vary within contexts, which will help in the design of policies both in micro and macro levels.
publishDate 2020
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2020
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
info:eu-repo/semantics/conferenceObject
Reunión
Journal
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_5794
info:ar-repo/semantics/documentoDeConferencia
status_str publishedVersion
format conferenceObject
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/11336/164401
Fairness concerns and social norms on redistributive preferences; XVII Reunión Nacional y VI Encuentro Internacional de la Asociación Argentina de Ciencias del Comportamiento; Posadas; Argentina; 2019; 191-192
1852-4206
CONICET Digital
CONICET
url http://hdl.handle.net/11336/164401
identifier_str_mv Fairness concerns and social norms on redistributive preferences; XVII Reunión Nacional y VI Encuentro Internacional de la Asociación Argentina de Ciencias del Comportamiento; Posadas; Argentina; 2019; 191-192
1852-4206
CONICET Digital
CONICET
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://revistas.unc.edu.ar/index.php/racc/issue/view/2105/327
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ar/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ar/
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
application/pdf
application/pdf
dc.coverage.none.fl_str_mv Nacional
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Psicología
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Psicología
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
reponame_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
collection CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname_str Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.name.fl_str_mv CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.mail.fl_str_mv dasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.ar
_version_ 1844614421941321728
score 13.070432