We perform an experimental analysis to investigate participants’ choices of allocative criteria under different conditions. We document that performance-based criteria guaranteeing a minimal egalitarian base are widely preferred by both neutral spectators and stakeholders without information on relative payoffs, although popularity among stakeholders is mostly due to self-interest considerations and optimism concerning their expected performance. Information regarding the distribution of payoffs under different criteria dramatically reduces such choice because the self-interest motive directly emerges, and most players opt to revise their decision in favor of the criterion maximizing their own payoff.
Ahlert, M., K. Funke, and L. Schwettmann. 2013. “Thresholds, Productivity, and Context: An Experimental Study on Determinants of Distributive Behavior.” Social Choice and Welfare 40:957–984.10.1007/s00355-012-0652-8)| false
Babcock, L., X. Wang, and G. Loewenstein. 1996. “Choosing the Wrong Pond: Social Comparisons in Negotiations that Reflect a Self-Serving Bias.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 111 (1):1–19.10.2307/2946655)| false
Becchetti, L., G. Degli Antoni, S. Ottone, and N. Solferino. 2013. “Allocation Criteria under Task Performance: The Gendered Preference for Protection.” Journal of Socio-Economics 45:96–111.10.1016/j.socec.2013.05.005)| false
Bolton, G., and A. Ockenfels. 2008. “Risk Taking and Social Comparison. A Comment on ‘Betrayal Aversion: Evidence from Brazil, China, Oman, Switzerland, Turkey, and the United States’.” American Economic Review 100 (1):628–633.
Bond, D., and J.C. Park. 1991. “An Empirical Test of Rawls’s Theory of Justice: A Second Approach, in Korea and in the United States.” Simulation & Gaming 22:443–462.
Bone, J., P. Crosetto, J.D. Hey, and C. Pasca. 2013. “Change versus Choice: Eliciting Attitudes to Fair Compensations.” Jena Economic Research Papers 2013-029, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena, Max-Planck-Institute of Economics.
Buchanan, J.M. 1986. Liberty, Market and State: Political Economy in the 1980s. Brighton: Wheatsheaf Books.
Burrows, P., and G. Loomes. 1994. “The Impact of Fairness on Bargaining Behavior.” Empirical Economics 19:201–221.
Cappelen, A., A.D. Hole, E.Ø. Sørensen, and B. Tungodden. 2011. “The Importance of Moral Reflection and Self-Reported Data in a Dictator Game with Production.” Social Choice and Welfare 36 (1):105–120.
Cappelen, A., A.D. Hole, E.Ø. Sørensen, and B. Tungodden. 2011. “The Importance of Moral Reflection and Self-Reported Data in a Dictator Game with Production.” Social Choice and Welfare 36 (1):105–120.10.1007/s00355-010-0468-3)| false
Cappelen, A., J. Konow, E.Ø. Sørensen, and B. Tungodden. 2013a. “Just Luck: An Experimental Study of Risk-Taking and Fairness.” American Economic Review 103 (4):1398–1413.10.1257/aer.103.4.1398)| false
Dela Cruz-Doña, R., and A. Martina. 2000. “Diverse Groups Agreeing on a System of Justice in Distribution: Evidence from the Philippines.” Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics 11:35–76.10.1177/02601079X00001100103)| false
Durante, R., L. Putterman, and J. Van Der Weele. 2014. “Preferences For Redistribution And Perception Of Fairness: An Experimental Study.” Journal of the European Economic Association 12 (4):1059–1086.
Durante, R., L. Putterman, and J. Van Der Weele. 2014. “Preferences For Redistribution And Perception Of Fairness: An Experimental Study.” Journal of the European Economic Association 12 (4):1059–1086.10.1111/jeea.12082)| false
Farina, F., and G. Grimalda. 2011. “A Cross-Country Experimental Comparison of Preferences for Redistribution”. Università di Siena, Dipartimento di politica economica, finanza e sviluppo.
Forsythe, R., J. Horowitz, N. Savin, and M. Sefton. 1994. “Some Doubts about MeasuringSelf-interest Using Dictator Experiments: The Cost of Anonymity Fairness in Simple Bargaining Games.” Games and Economic Behavior 1:60–79.
Frohlich, N., J.A. Oppenheimer, and C.L. Eavey. 1987a. “Choices of Principles of Distributive Justice in Experimental Groups.” American Journal of Political Science 31:606–636.
Hamman, J., G. Loewenstein, and R.A. Weber. 2010. “Self-Interest through Delegation: An Additional Rationale for the Principal-Agent Relationship.” American Economic Review 100:1826–1846.10.1257/aer.100.4.1826)| false
Hoffman, E., and M.L. Spitzer. 1985. “Entitlements, Rights, and Fairness: An Experimental Examination of Subjects’ Concepts of Distributive Justice.” Journal of Legal Studies 14:259–297.10.1086/467773)| false
Holt, C.A. 1986. “Scoring-Rule Procedures for Eliciting Subjective Probability and Utility Functions.” In Bayesian Inference and Decision Techniques, ed. by P. Goel and A. Zellner, 279–290. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Holt, C.A., and S.K. Laury. 2002. “Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects.” American Economic Review 92 (5):1644–1655.
Huck, S., and G. Weizsacker. 2002. “Do Players Correctly Estimate What Others Do? Evidence of Conservatism in Beliefs.” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 47 (1):71–85.10.1016/S0167-2681(01)00170-6)| false
Kagel, J., C. Kim, and D. Donald Moser. 1996. “Fairness in Ultimatum Games with Asymmetric Information and Asymmetric Payoffs.” Games and Economic Behavior 13 (1):100–110.10.1006/game.1996.0026)| false
Leventhal, G.S., and J.W. Michaels. 1971. “Locus of Cause and Equity Motivation as Determinants of Reward Allocation.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 17 (3):229–235.10.1037/h0030602)| false
Offerman, T., J. Sonnemans, G. Van De Kuilen, and P. Wakker. 2009. “A Truth-Serum for Non Bayesians: Correcting Proper Scoring Rules for Risk Attitudes.” Review of Economic Studies 76:1461–1489.10.1111/j.1467-937X.2009.00557.x)| false
The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy (BEJEAP) is an international forum for scholarship that employs microeconomics to analyze issues in business, consumer behavior and public policy. Topics include the interaction of firms, the functioning of markets, the effects of domestic and international policy and the design of organizations and institutions.