IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolet/v123y2014i2p168-170.html

On the fairness of random procedures

Author

Listed:
  • Eliaz, Kfir
  • Rubinstein, Ariel

Abstract

We consider procedures that use randomness to make a decision that involves several individuals. We asked subjects to compare the fairness of six pairs of seemingly equivalent procedures. We propose a classification of subjects into two categories: those who are “emotional” in the sense that they exhibit a systematic ranking of procedures on the basis of intuitive notions of fairness, and those who are “consequentialists” in the sense that they systematically view each pair of procedures as being equally fair. According to this classification, about 30% of the subjects are emotional while 31% are consequentialists.

Suggested Citation

  • Eliaz, Kfir & Rubinstein, Ariel, 2014. "On the fairness of random procedures," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 123(2), pages 168-170.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:123:y:2014:i:2:p:168-170
    DOI: 10.1016/j.econlet.2014.01.042
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165176514000561
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.econlet.2014.01.042?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chlaß, Nadine & Güth, Werner & Miettinen, Topi, 2019. "Purely procedural preferences - Beyond procedural equity and reciprocity," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 108-128.
    2. Gibbard, Allan, 1977. "Manipulation of Schemes That Mix Voting with Chance," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 45(3), pages 665-681, April.
    3. Kreps, David M & Porteus, Evan L, 1978. "Temporal Resolution of Uncertainty and Dynamic Choice Theory," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(1), pages 185-200, January.
    4. Gideon Keren & Karl H. Teigen, 2010. "Decisions by coin toss: Inappropriate but fair," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 5(2), pages 83-101, April.
    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


    Cited by:

    1. Elias Bouacida & Renaud Foucart, 2020. "The acceptability of lotteries in allocation problems," Working Papers 301646245, Lancaster University Management School, Economics Department.
    2. Korpela, Ville & Lombardi, Michele & Saulle, Riccardo D., 2024. "Designing rotation programs: Limits and possibilities," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 77-102.
    3. Christina Letsou & Shlomo Naeh & Uzi Segal, 2022. "All probabilities are equal, but some probabilities are more equal than others," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 74(2), pages 423-445, September.
    4. Khadjavi, Menusch & Tjaden, Jasper D., 2018. "Setting the bar - an experimental investigation of immigration requirements," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 160-169.
    5. Dold, Malte & Khadjavi, Menusch, 2017. "Jumping the queue: An experiment on procedural preferences," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 127-137.
    6. Elias Bouacida & Renaud Foucart, 2022. "Rituals of Reason," Working Papers 344119591, Lancaster University Management School, Economics Department.
    7. Bouacida, Elias & Foucart, Renaud, 2025. "Rituals of reason: Experimental evidence on the social acceptability of lotteries in allocation problems," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 23-36.
    8. Randolph Sloof & Ferdinand von Siemens, 2015. "Decision Initiation, Decision Implementation, and the Allocation of Decision Rights," CESifo Working Paper Series 5509, CESifo.
    9. André Schmelzer, 2016. "Single versus Multiple Randomization in Matching Mechanisms," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Behavioral Economics 2016_08, Max Planck Institute for Behavioral Economics, revised Mar 2017.
    10. Jose P. Arrieta & Yash R. Shrestha, 2022. "On the strategic value of equifinal choice," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 11(2), pages 37-45, June.
    11. Zhuzhu Zhou, 2024. "Ranking blame," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 78(2), pages 403-441, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. André Schmelzer, 2016. "Single versus Multiple Randomization in Matching Mechanisms," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Behavioral Economics 2016_08, Max Planck Institute for Behavioral Economics, revised Mar 2017.
    2. Luca De Gennaro Aquino & Sascha Desmettre & Yevhen Havrylenko & Mogens Steffensen, 2024. "Equilibrium control theory for Kihlstrom-Mirman preferences in continuous time," Papers 2407.16525, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2024.
    3. Felix Brandt & Patrick Lederer & René Romen, 2024. "Relaxed notions of Condorcet-consistency and efficiency for strategyproof social decision schemes," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 63(1), pages 19-55, August.
    4. René Garcia & Richard Luger & Eric Renault, 2000. "Asymmetric Smiles, Leverage Effects and Structural Parameters," Working Papers 2000-57, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    5. Borovička, Jaroslav & Hansen, Lars Peter, 2014. "Examining macroeconomic models through the lens of asset pricing," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 183(1), pages 67-90.
    6. Matthias Schmidt & Hermann Held & Elmar Kriegler & Alexander Lorenz, 2013. "Climate Policy Under Uncertain and Heterogeneous Climate Damages," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 54(1), pages 79-99, January.
    7. Stephen Satchell & Susan Thorp, 2007. "Scenario Analysis with Recursive Utility: Dynamic Consumption Plans for Charitable Endowments," Research Paper Series 209, Quantitative Finance Research Centre, University of Technology, Sydney.
    8. Yaron Azrieli & Christopher P. Chambers & Paul J. Healy, 2020. "Incentives in experiments with objective lotteries," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(1), pages 1-29, March.
    9. Fahrenwaldt, Matthias Albrecht & Jensen, Ninna Reitzel & Steffensen, Mogens, 2020. "Nonrecursive separation of risk and time preferences," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 95-108.
    10. Konstantinos Georgalos & Indrajit Ray & Sonali SenGupta, 2020. "Nash versus coarse correlation," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(4), pages 1178-1204, December.
    11. Souvik Roy & Soumyarup Sadhukhan, 2019. "A characterization of random min–max domains and its applications," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 68(4), pages 887-906, November.
    12. Bommier, Antoine & Lanz, Bruno & Zuber, Stéphane, 2015. "Models-as-usual for unusual risks? On the value of catastrophic climate change," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 1-22.
    13. Jaroslav Borovička & Lars Peter Hansen & José A. Scheinkman, 2016. "Misspecified Recovery," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 71(6), pages 2493-2544, December.
    14. Koszegi, Botond, 2003. "Health anxiety and patient behavior," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(6), pages 1073-1084, November.
    15. Segal, Uzi, 1987. "The Ellsberg Paradox and Risk Aversion: An Anticipated Utility Approach," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 28(1), pages 175-202, February.
    16. Isaenko, Sergei, 2008. "The term structure of interest rates in a pure exchange economy where investors have heterogeneous recursive preferences," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 457-481, August.
    17. Felix Brandt & Patrick Lederer, 2024. "Weak Strategyproofness in Randomized Social Choice," Papers 2412.11977, arXiv.org.
    18. Felix Brandt & Patrick Lederer & Warut Suksompong, 2022. "Incentives in Social Decision Schemes with Pairwise Comparison Preferences," Papers 2204.12436, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2024.
    19. Diebold, Franz & Bichler, Martin, 2017. "Matching with indifferences: A comparison of algorithms in the context of course allocation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 260(1), pages 268-282.
    20. Hoel, Michael & Iversen, Tor & Nilssen, Tore & Vislie, Jon, 2003. "Genetic testing and repulsion from chance," Memorandum 20/2003, Oslo University, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D9 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics
    • C6 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling

    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:eee:ecolet:v:123:y:2014:i:2:p:168-170. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolet .

    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.