Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

An experimental study on individual choice, social welfare, and social preferences

Contents:

Author Info

  • Traub, Stefan
  • Seidl, Christian
  • Schmidt, Ulrich

Abstract

We experimentally study subjects' compliance with dominance relationships of income distributions in a ranking task. The experiment consisted of four different treatments: Lottery, individual choice, social preferences, and social planner. Our results suggest that people's risk attitudes do not adequately reflect their inequality attitudes. Uninvolved social planners exhibit randomization preferences, while self-interested social planners are generally more inequality averse and try to avoid extreme outcomes.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6V64-4SNNT8J-1/2/f5a8cda998308241a53ef83d553310c2
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal European Economic Review.

Volume (Year): 53 (2009)
Issue (Month): 4 (May)
Pages: 385-400

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:eee:eecrev:v:53:y:2009:i:4:p:385-400

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eer

Related research

Keywords: Inequality Risk Social preferences Procedural fairness;

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, 1999. "A Theory Of Fairness, Competition, And Cooperation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, MIT Press, vol. 114(3), pages 817-868, August.
  2. Machina, Mark J, 1982. ""Expected Utility" Analysis without the Independence Axiom," Econometrica, Econometric Society, Econometric Society, vol. 50(2), pages 277-323, March.
  3. Robin Cubitt & Chris Starmer & Robert Sugden, 1998. "On the Validity of the Random Lottery Incentive System," Experimental Economics, Springer, Springer, vol. 1(2), pages 115-131, September.
  4. Charness, Gary & Rabin, Matthew, 2002. "Understanding Social Preferences with Simple Tests," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley qt3d04q5sm, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
  5. Robert H. Strotz, 1961. "How Income Ought To Be Distributed: Paradox Regained," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, University of Chicago Press, vol. 69, pages 271.
  6. Beattie, Jane & Loomes, Graham, 1997. "The Impact of Incentives upon Risky Choice Experiments," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 155-68, March.
  7. Van Huyck, John B & Battalio, Raymond C & Beil, Richard O, 1990. "Tacit Coordination Games, Strategic Uncertainty, and Coordination Failure," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 80(1), pages 234-48, March.
  8. Traub, Stefan & Seidl, Christian & Schmidt, Ulrich & Levati, Maria Vittoria, 2003. "Friedman, Harsanyi, Rawls, Boulding - or Somebody Else?," Economics Working Papers 2003,03, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Department of Economics.
  9. Steven R. Beckman & Buhong Zheng & John P. Formby & W. James Smith, 2002. "Envy, malice and Pareto efficiency: An experimental examination," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 349-367.
  10. Yoram Kroll & Liema Davidovitz, 2003. "Inequality Aversion versus Risk Aversion," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 70(277), pages 19-29, February.
  11. H. P. Nzitat, 2001. "From Equality to Inequality : The Diamond-Sen Criticism of Harsanyi's Criterion of Social Justice," THEMA Working Papers 2001-12, THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise.
  12. Bruno S. Frey & Matthias Benz & Alois Stutzer, . "Introducing Procedural Utility: Not only What, but also How Matters," IEW - Working Papers 129, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
  13. James Andreoni & John Miller, 2002. "Giving According to GARP: An Experimental Test of the Consistency of Preferences for Altruism," Econometrica, Econometric Society, Econometric Society, vol. 70(2), pages 737-753, March.
  14. Amiel, Yoram & Cowell, Frank A., 1992. "Measurement of income inequality : Experimental test by questionnaire," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 3-26, February.
  15. Casilda Lasso de la Vega & Christian Seidl, 2007. "The Impossibility of a Just Pigouvian," Working Papers 69, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
  16. Atkinson, Anthony B., 1970. "On the measurement of inequality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 244-263, September.
  17. Shorrocks, A F, 1980. "The Class of Additively Decomposable Inequality Measures," Econometrica, Econometric Society, Econometric Society, vol. 48(3), pages 613-25, April.
  18. Starmer, Chris & Sugden, Robert, 1991. "Does the Random-Lottery Incentive System Elicit True Preferences? An Experimental Investigation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 81(4), pages 971-78, September.
  19. Guth, Werner & Schmittberger, Rolf & Schwarze, Bernd, 1982. "An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 367-388, December.
  20. Gaertner, Wulf & Namazie, Ceema, 2003. "Income inequality, risk, and the transfer principle: A questionnaire-experimental investigation," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 229-245, April.
  21. Camerer, Colin F. & Hogarth, Robin M., 1999. "The Effects of Financial Incentives in Experiments: A Review and Capital-Labor-Production Framework," Working Papers, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences 1059, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
  22. Robert H. Strotz, 1958. "How Income Ought to be Distributed: A Paradox in Distributive Ethics," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, University of Chicago Press, vol. 66, pages 189.
  23. Rubin Saposnik, 1981. "Rank-dominance in income distributions," Public Choice, Springer, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 147-151, January.
  24. Eva Camacho-Cuena & Tibor Neugebauer & Christian Seidl, 2007. "Leaky Buckets Versus Compensating Justice: An Experimental Investigation," Working Papers 74, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
  25. Olivier Armantier, 2006. "Do Wealth Differences Affect Fairness Considerations?," CIRANO Working Papers, CIRANO 2006s-13, CIRANO.
  26. Epstein, Larry G & Segal, Uzi, 1992. "Quadratic Social Welfare Functions," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, University of Chicago Press, vol. 100(4), pages 691-712, August.
  27. Cowell, Frank A. & Schokkaert, Erik, 2001. "Risk perceptions and distributional judgments," European Economic Review, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 45(4-6), pages 941-952, May.
  28. Cowell, F A, 1985. "'A Fair Suck of the Sauce Bottle' or What Do You Mean by Inequality?," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 61(173), pages 567-79, June.
  29. Blackorby, Charles & Donaldson, David, 1978. "Measures of relative equality and their meaning in terms of social welfare," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 59-80, June.
  30. Milton Friedman, 1953. "Choice, Chance, and the Personal Distribution of Income," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, University of Chicago Press, vol. 61, pages 277.
  31. Carlsson, Fredrik & Daruvala, Dinky & Johansson-Stenman, Olof, 2001. "Are People Inequality Averse Or Just Risk Averse?," Working Papers in Economics 43, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
  32. John C. Harsanyi, 1953. "Cardinal Utility in Welfare Economics and in the Theory of Risk-taking," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, University of Chicago Press, vol. 61, pages 434.
  33. Shorrocks, Anthony F, 1983. "Ranking Income Distributions," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 50(197), pages 3-17, February.
  34. Smith, Vernon L, 1982. "Microeconomic Systems as an Experimental Science," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 72(5), pages 923-55, December.
  35. Peter A. Diamond, 1967. "Cardinal Welfare, Individualistic Ethics, and Interpersonal Comparison of Utility: Comment," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, University of Chicago Press, vol. 75, pages 765.
  36. Axel Ockenfels & Gary E. Bolton, 2000. "ERC: A Theory of Equity, Reciprocity, and Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 90(1), pages 166-193, March.
  37. David K Levine, 1997. "Modeling Altruism and Spitefulness in Experiments," Levine's Working Paper Archive 2047, David K. Levine.
  38. Shugan, Steven M, 1980. " The Cost of Thinking," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, University of Chicago Press, vol. 7(2), pages 99-111, Se.
  39. Camacho-Cuena, Eva & Seidl, Christian & Morone, Andrea, 2005. "Comparing preference reversal for general lotteries and income distributions," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 682-710, October.
  40. John C. Harsanyi, 1955. "Cardinal Welfare, Individualistic Ethics, and Interpersonal Comparisons of Utility," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, University of Chicago Press, vol. 63, pages 309.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as in new window

Cited by:
  1. Balafoutas, Loukas & Kocher, Martin G. & Putterman, Louis & Sutter, Matthias, 2013. "Equality, equity and incentives: An experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 32-51.
  2. Yoram Amiel & Michele Bernasconi & Michele Bernasconi & Frank A Cowell & Valentino Dardanoni & Valentino Dardanoni, 2013. "Do We Value Mobility?," STICERD - Public Economics Programme Discussion Papers, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE 17, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
  3. Stefan Trautmann, 2010. "Individual fairness in Harsanyi’s utilitarianism: operationalizing all-inclusive utility," Theory and Decision, Springer, Springer, vol. 68(4), pages 405-415, April.
  4. Sabrina Teyssier, 2012. "Inequity and risk aversion in sequential public good games," Public Choice, Springer, Springer, vol. 151(1), pages 91-119, April.
  5. repec:pdn:wpaper:13 is not listed on IDEAS
  6. Jeremiah Hurley & Neil Buckley & Katherine Cuff & Mita Giacomini & David Cameron, 2011. "Judgments regarding the fair division of goods: the impact of verbal versus quantitative descriptions of alternative divisions," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 341-372, July.
  7. Tim Krieger & Stefan Traub, 2008. "Back to Bismarck? Shifting Preferences for Intragenerational Redistribution in OECD Pension Systems," Working Papers CIE 13, University of Paderborn, CIE Center for International Economics.
  8. John Hey & Carmen Pasca, . "Inferring Social Preferences over Income Distributions through Axioms," Discussion Papers, Department of Economics, University of York 09/18, Department of Economics, University of York.
  9. Fabian Paetzel & Rupert Sausgruber & Stefan Traub, 2014. "Social Preferences and Voting on Reform: An Experimental Study," Department of Economics Working Papers wuwp172, Vienna University of Economics, Department of Economics.
  10. Bernhard Kittel & Wolfgang Luhan, 2013. "Decision making in networks: an experiment on structure effects in a group dictator game," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 141-154, January.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:eecrev:v:53:y:2009:i:4:p:385-400. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.