Individual Sense of Fairness: An Experimental Study
AbstractThis paper presents an experimental test of the theory of individual sense of fairness of Karni and Safra (2000). According to this theory individuals' choice among random procedures designed to allocate indivisible goods is motivated, in part, by concern for fairness. The experimental study is intended to test this hypothesis. In the experiments, the subjects are asked to play a three person dictator game. The dictator, player A, is presented with a feasible set of lotteries that assign to each player a probability of winning a $15 prize. Player A is asked to choose a lottery from the feasible set (i.e. a point along a chord in the two-dimensional probability simplex) to be used in actually allocating the prize. The feasible set is constructed such that by giving up some of his own probability of winning the prize, player A can make the overall lottery more ``fair''. If these subjects have no concern for fairness, they will choose the lottery that assigns them the highest probability of winning. However, if they have preference for fairness, they may choose a lottery farther down the chord thereby trading off some of their own chance of winning for a fairer allocation procedure. The results indicate strongly bi-modal outcomes with around half of the subjects keeping the initial allocation which yields the highest probability of winning for the dictator while the other half chooses very close to the ``perfect equity'' point along the chord. Several other properties of the subjects' preferences are also checked such as whether or not their preferences are symmetric with respect to the other players, the impact of endowment effects on preferences for fairness and the notion of fairness that underlies their choices.
Download InfoIf 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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Rutgers University, Department of Economics in its series Departmental Working Papers with number 200107.
Date of creation: 18 Oct 2001
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: New Jersey Hall - 75 Hamilton Street, New Brunswick, NJ 08901-1248
Phone: (732) 932-7482
Fax: (732) 932-7416
Web page: http://snde.rutgers.edu/Rutgers/wp/rutgers-wplist.html
More information through EDIRC
experiments; fairness; individual choice;
Other versions of this item:
- Edi Karni & Tim Salmon & Barry Sopher, 2008. "Individual sense of fairness: an experimental study," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 174-189, June.
- C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
- D90 - Microeconomics - - Intertemporal Choice - - - General
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.:
- Karni, Edi & Safra, Zvi, 2002. "Intensity of the Sense of Fairness: Measurement and Behavioral Characterization," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 105(2), pages 318-337, August.
- Ray Fisman & Shachar Kariv & Daniel Markovits, 2005. "Pareto Damaging Behaviors," Levine's Bibliography 784828000000000081, UCLA Department of Economics.
- Smith, Vernon L, 1976. "Experimental Economics: Induced Value Theory," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 66(2), pages 274-79, May.
- Romer, Paul M., 2000.
"Thinking and Feeling,"
1618, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
- Hoffman Elizabeth & McCabe Kevin & Shachat Keith & Smith Vernon, 1994. "Preferences, Property Rights, and Anonymity in Bargaining Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 346-380, November.
- Forsythe Robert & Horowitz Joel L. & Savin N. E. & Sefton Martin, 1994. "Fairness in Simple Bargaining Experiments," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 347-369, May.
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page. reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral 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: ().
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.