Literature DB >> 28277692

Not taking responsibility: Equity trumps efficiency in allocation decisions.

Tom Gordon-Hecker1, Daniela Rosensaft-Eshel1, Andrea Pittarello2, Shaul Shalvi3, Yoella Bereby-Meyer1.   

Abstract

When allocating resources, equity and efficiency may conflict. When resources are scarce and cannot be distributed equally, one may choose to destroy resources and reduce societal welfare to maintain equity among its members. We examined whether people are averse to inequitable outcomes per se or to being responsible for deciding how inequity should be implemented. Three scenario-based experiments and one incentivized experiment revealed that participants are inequity responsibility averse: when asked to decide which of the 2 equally deserving individuals should receive a reward, they rather discarded the reward than choosing who will get it. This tendency diminished significantly when participants had the possibility to use a random device to allocate the reward. The finding suggests that it is more difficult to be responsible for the way inequity is implemented than to create inequity per se. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28277692     DOI: 10.1037/xge0000273

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen        ISSN: 0022-1015


  2 in total

1.  Catalyzing decisions: How a coin flip strengthens affective reactions.

Authors:  Mariela E Jaffé; Leonie Reutner; Rainer Greifeneder
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-08-14       Impact factor: 3.240

2.  Racial Ingroup Bias and Efficiency Consideration Influence Distributive Decisions: A Dynamic Analysis of Time Domain and Time Frequency.

Authors:  Jiaxin Yu; Yan Wang; Jianling Yu; Jianmin Zeng
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2021-05-10       Impact factor: 4.677

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.