首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Experimental Psychology. General >Not Taking Responsibility: Equity Trumps Efficiency in Allocation Decisions
【24h】

Not Taking Responsibility: Equity Trumps Efficiency in Allocation Decisions

机译:不承担责任:股权胜过分配决策的效率

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

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.
机译:在分配资源时,股权和效率可能会发生冲突。 当资源稀缺而且不能平等分发时,人们可以选择摧毁资源并减少社会福利以维持其成员之间的股权。 我们审查了人们是否厌恶不公平的结果本身或负责决定如何实施不平等。 基于情景的实验和一个激励的实验表明,参与者是不公平的责任:当被要求决定2个平等的个人应该获得奖励时,他们相当丢弃了奖励,而不是选择谁将获得奖励。 当参与者有可能使用随机设备分配奖励时,这种趋势显着减弱。 该发现表明,对不公平实施的方式更加困难,而不是创造不平等本身。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号