IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cud/journl/v38y2015i106p27-36.html

An experimental study of gender differences in distributive justice

Author

Listed:
  • Ismael Rodriguez-Lara

    (Department of Economics and International Development, Middlesex University London, Business School, Hendon Campus, The Buroughs, London NW4 4BT, United Kingdom)

Abstract

This paper shows that women are more likely than men to employ the fair allocation that most benefits their financial payoff. The experimental evidence is gleaned from a dictator game with production, in which subjects first solve a quiz to accumulate earnings and then divide the surplus by choosing one over five different allocations, some of which represent a fairness ideal. The data also suggest that women are more sensitive to the context as their allocation choices depend on whether they have accumulated more or less money than their counterparts. This is not the case for the men's allocation choices.

Suggested Citation

  • Ismael Rodriguez-Lara, 2015. "An experimental study of gender differences in distributive justice," Cuadernos de Economía - Spanish Journal of Economics and Finance, Asociación Cuadernos de Economía, vol. 38(106), pages 27-36, Abril.
    • Handle: RePEc:cud:journl:v:38:y:2015:i:106:p:27-36
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repositorio.uam.es/bitstream/handle/10486/685293/CE_106_3.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Smriti Sharma, 2015. "Gender and Distributional Preferences: Experimental Evidence from India," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2015-062, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    2. Wulf Gaertner & Yi Li, 2025. "Exempting agents from any burden sharing: A lab-experimental study on the distribution of a monetary loss," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 23(3), pages 857-879, September.
    3. Hundsdoerfer, Jochen & Matthaei, Eva Kristina, 2020. "Gender discriminatory taxes, fairness perception, and labor supply," Discussion Papers 2020/6, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.
    4. Sharma, Smriti, 2015. "Gender and distributional preferences: Experimental evidence from India," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 113-123.
    5. Sharma, Smriti, 2015. "Gender and distributional preferences: Experimental evidence from India," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 113-123.
    6. Jochen Hundsdoerfer & Eva Matthaei, 2022. "Gender Discriminatory Taxes, Fairness Perception, and Labor Supply," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 78(1-2), pages 156-207.
    7. Glenn Althor & Bradd Witt, 2020. "A quantitative systematic review of distributive environmental justice literature: a rich history and the need for an enterprising future," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 10(1), pages 91-103, March.
    8. Halladay, Brianna & Landsman, Rachel, 2024. "Shame on me: Emotions and gender differences in taking with earned endowments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 111(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D30 - Microeconomics - - Distribution - - - General
    • D64 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Altruism; Philanthropy; Intergenerational Transfers
    • J16 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination

    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:cud:journl:v:38:y:2015:i:106:p:27-36. 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: Erick Tinsson (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.