IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bon/boncrc/crctr224_2021_318v1.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Shallow Meritocracy: An Experiment on Fairness Views

Author

Listed:
  • Peter Andre

Abstract

Meritocracies aspire to reward effort and hard work but promise not to judge individuals by the circumstances they were born into. The choice to work hard is, however, often shaped by circumstances. This study investigates whether people’s merit judgments are sensitive to this endogeneity of choice. In a series of incentivized experiments with a large, representative US sample, study participants judge how much money two workers deserve for the effort they exerted. In the treatment condition, unequal circumstances strongly discourage one of the workers from working hard. Nonetheless, I find that individuals hold the disadvantaged worker fully responsible for his choice. They do so, even though they understand that choices are strongly influenced by circumstances. Additional experiments identify the cause of this neglect. In light of an uncertain counterfactual state – what would have happened on a level playing field – participants base their merit judgments on the only reliable evidence they possess - observed effort levels. I confirm these patterns in a structural model of merit views and a vignette study with real-world scenarios.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter Andre, 2021. "Shallow Meritocracy: An Experiment on Fairness Views," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2021_318v1, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:bon:boncrc:crctr224_2021_318v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.crctr224.de/research/discussion-papers/archive/dp318
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Nina Weber, 2023. "Prosocial Risk-Taking: Growing the Pie or Increasing your Slice?," ifo Working Paper Series 399, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
    2. Deivis Angeli & Matt Lowe & The Village Team & Matthew Lowe, 2023. "Virtue Signals," CESifo Working Paper Series 10475, CESifo.
    3. Lundberg, Shelly, 2022. "Gender Economics: Dead-Ends and New Opportunities," IZA Discussion Papers 15217, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Meritocracy; attitudes toward inequality; redistribution; fairness; responsibility; social preferences; inference; uncertain counterfactual;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making
    • H23 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Externalities; Redistributive Effects; Environmental Taxes and Subsidies

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bon:boncrc:crctr224_2021_318v1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CRC Office (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.crctr224.de .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.