IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kea/keappr/ker-20180701-34-2-02.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Peer Pressure with Inequity Aversion

Author

Listed:
  • Kangsik Choi

    (Pusan National University)

  • Jae-Joon Han

    (Inha University)

  • Minhwan Lee

    (Inha University)

Abstract

To examine the effects of peer pressure on outputs under symmetric and asymmetric information, we define a peer pressure function representing psychological costs and incorporate it into the agent’s utility function. Under symmetric information, an efficient agent who is averse to inequity (i.e., suffering from being ahead) produces less than he does without peer pressure whereas an inefficient agent suffering from being behind produces more such that the output gap between the two types of agents is lessened. Moreover, overproduction in total output will occur if the inefficient agent’s disadvantage inequity aversion is greater than that of the efficient agent’s. However, as the information structure becomes asymmetric, the overproduction disappears because the information rent paid to the efficient agent becomes too burdensome so that it countervails the active peer pressure effect. These results are consistent with previous findings from empirical and experimental studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Kangsik Choi & Jae-Joon Han & Minhwan Lee, 2018. "Peer Pressure with Inequity Aversion," Korean Economic Review, Korean Economic Association, vol. 34, pages 131-155.
  • Handle: RePEc:kea:keappr:ker-20180701-34-2-02
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://keapaper.kea.ne.kr/RePEc/kea/keappr/KER-20180701-34-2-02.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pedro Rey‐Biel, 2008. "Inequity Aversion and Team Incentives," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 110(2), pages 297-320, June.
    2. Encinosa III, William E. & Gaynor, Martin & Rebitzer, James B., 2007. "The sociology of groups and the economics of incentives: Theory and evidence on compensation systems," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 187-214, February.
    3. Oriana Bandiera & Iwan Barankay & Imran Rasul, 2005. "Social Preferences and the Response to Incentives: Evidence from Personnel Data," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 120(3), pages 917-962.
    4. Andrew E. Clark & Paul Frijters & Michael A. Shields, 2008. "Relative Income, Happiness, and Utility: An Explanation for the Easterlin Paradox and Other Puzzles," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 46(1), pages 95-144, March.
    5. Kübler, Dorothea & Müller, Wieland & Normann, Hans-Theo, 2008. "Job-market signaling and screening: An experimental comparison," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 219-236, September.
    6. Daniel G. Hansen, 1997. "Worker Performance and Group Incentives: A Case Study," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 51(1), pages 37-49, October.
    7. Rosaz, Julie & Slonim, Robert & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2016. "Quitting and peer effects at work," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 55-67.
    8. Barron, John M & Gjerde, Kathy Paulson, 1997. "Peer Pressure in an Agency Relationship," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 15(2), pages 234-254, April.
    9. Joshua Herries & Daniel I. Rees & Jeffrey S. Zax, 2003. "Interdependence in worker productivity," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(5), pages 585-604.
    10. Steffen Huck & Pedro Rey-Biel, 2006. "Endogenous Leadership in Teams," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 162(2), pages 253-261, June.
    11. Axel Ockenfels & Gary E. Bolton, 2000. "ERC: A Theory of Equity, Reciprocity, and Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(1), pages 166-193, March.
    12. Huck, Steffen & Kübler, Dorothea & Weibull, Jörgen, 2012. "Social norms and economic incentives in firms," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 83(2), pages 173-185.
    13. Burkhard Hehenkamp & Oddvar Kaarboe, 2006. "When Should the Talented Receive Weaker Incentives? Peer Pressure in Teams," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 62(1), pages 124-148, March.
    14. Fehr, Ernst & Schmidt, Klaus M., 2006. "The Economics of Fairness, Reciprocity and Altruism - Experimental Evidence and New Theories," Handbook on the Economics of Giving, Reciprocity and Altruism, in: S. Kolm & Jean Mercier Ythier (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Giving, Altruism and Reciprocity, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 8, pages 615-691, Elsevier.
    15. Jonathan Guryan & Kory Kroft & Matthew J. Notowidigdo, 2009. "Peer Effects in the Workplace: Evidence from Random Groupings in Professional Golf Tournaments," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 1(4), pages 34-68, October.
    16. Kangsik Choi, 2009. "Conformism, peer pressure and adverse selection," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(26), pages 3403-3409.
    17. Easterlin, Richard A., 1995. "Will raising the incomes of all increase the happiness of all?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 35-47, June.
    18. David Masclet, 2002. "Peer Pressure in Work Teams : The effects of Inequity Aversion," Post-Print halshs-00178476, HAL.
    19. Kohei Daido, 2004. "Risk-averse agents with peer pressure," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(6), pages 383-386.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Brice Corgnet, 2018. "Rac(g)e Against the Machine? Social Incentives When Humans Meet Robots," Post-Print halshs-01984467, HAL.
    2. Choi, Kangsik, 2016. "A Note On Envy And Earnings Inequality Under Limited Liability Contracts," Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics, Hitotsubashi University, vol. 57(1), pages 91-109, June.
    3. Huck, Steffen & Kübler, Dorothea & Weibull, Jörgen, 2012. "Social norms and economic incentives in firms," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 83(2), pages 173-185.
    4. Gill, David & Stone, Rebecca, 2015. "Desert and inequity aversion in teams," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 42-54.
    5. Pedro Rey‐Biel, 2008. "Inequity Aversion and Team Incentives," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 110(2), pages 297-320, June.
    6. Vera Brenčič, 2015. "Employers' Efforts to Deter Shirking in Teams: Evidence from Job Vacancies," LABOUR, CEIS, vol. 29(1), pages 52-78, March.
    7. Roberto Sarkisian, 2017. "Team Incentives under Moral and Altruistic Preferences: Which Team to Choose?," Games, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-24, September.
    8. Gaute Torsvik, 2017. "Workplace Productivity and Bonus Preferences: Why Do Men With Low Productivity Prefer Individual Pay?," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 84(335), pages 498-515, July.
    9. Bental, Benjamin & Kragl, Jenny, 2021. "Inequality and incentives with societal other-regarding preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 1298-1324.
    10. Yingchao Zhang & Oliver Fabel & Christian Thomann, 2015. "Pay inequity effects on back-office employees’ job performances: the case of a large insurance firm," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 23(2), pages 421-439, June.
    11. Koji Abe & Hajime Kobayashi & Hideo Suehiro, 2014. "Leadership in the Prisoner's Dilemma with Inequity-Averse Preferences," Discussion Papers 2014-09, Kobe University, Graduate School of Business Administration.
    12. Jérémy Celse, 2017. "An Experimental Investigation of the Impact of Absolute and Relative Inequalities on Individual Satisfaction," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 939-958, August.
    13. Aakvik, Arild & Hansen, Frank & Torsvik, Gaute, 2013. "Dynamic Peer Effects in Sales Teams," Working Papers in Economics 10/13, University of Bergen, Department of Economics.
    14. Sarkisian, Roberto, 2017. "Team Incentives under Moral and Altruistic Preferences: Which Team to Choose?," TSE Working Papers 17-838, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    15. Yamada, Katsunori & Sato, Masayuki, 2013. "Another avenue for anatomy of income comparisons: Evidence from hypothetical choice experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 35-57.
    16. Dur, Robert & Sol, Joeri, 2010. "Social interaction, co-worker altruism, and incentives," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 293-301, July.
    17. Alwine Mohnen & Kathrin Pokorny & Dirk Sliwka, 2008. "Transparency, Inequity Aversion, and the Dynamics of Peer Pressure in Teams: Theory and Evidence," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 26(4), pages 693-720, October.
    18. Ahrens, Steffen & Snower, Dennis J., 2014. "Envy, guilt, and the Phillips curve," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 69-84.
    19. Brice Corgnet & Brian Gunia & Roberto Hernán González, 2021. "Harnessing the power of social incentives to curb shirking in teams," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(1), pages 139-167, February.
    20. Bartling, Björn & von Siemens, Ferdinand A., 2010. "The intensity of incentives in firms and markets: Moral hazard with envious agents," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 598-607, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    First Peer Pressure; Inequity Aversion; Adverse Selection; Total Output; Trade-off;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
    • L23 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Organization of Production
    • M12 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Personnel Management; Executives; Executive Compensation
    • M52 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Personnel Economics - - - Compensation and Compensation Methods and Their Effects
    • M54 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Personnel Economics - - - Labor Management

    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:kea:keappr:ker-20180701-34-2-02. 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: KEA (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/keaaaea.html .

    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.