IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0268286.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Socioeconomic status differences in psychological responses to unfair treatments: Behavioral evidence of a vicious cycle

Author

Listed:
  • Youngju Kim
  • Jaewuk Jung
  • Jinkyung Na

Abstract

Two studies investigated whether lower socioeconomic status (SES) would be associated with greater tolerance for unfair treatments. Specifically, we hypothesized that individuals with lower SES would be less likely to perceive apparent injustice as unfair than those with higher SES, and furthermore, such differences in perception would lead to the corresponding differences in ensuing psychological responses. In support of the hypotheses, we found that (Study 1, N = 326; Study 2, N = 130), compared with higher SES participants, lower SES participants perceived one-sidedly disadvantageous distribution during the dictator game as less unfair. Moreover, a behavioral experiment in Study 2 showed that such tolerance for unfair treatments were associated with subsequent passive reactions in the ultimatum game. Taken together, the results imply a vicious cycle whereby the SES differences in a tendency to accept unfair treatments lead to psychological responses that may maintain or even strengthen the existing social disparities.

Suggested Citation

  • Youngju Kim & Jaewuk Jung & Jinkyung Na, 2022. "Socioeconomic status differences in psychological responses to unfair treatments: Behavioral evidence of a vicious cycle," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(6), pages 1-16, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0268286
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0268286
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0268286
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0268286&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0268286?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, 1999. "A Theory of Fairness, Competition, and Cooperation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(3), pages 817-868.
    2. Julia K Boehm & Ying Chen & David R Williams & Carol Ryff & Laura D Kubzansky, 2015. "Unequally Distributed Psychological Assets: Are There Social Disparities in Optimism, Life Satisfaction, and Positive Affect?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(2), pages 1-16, February.
    3. Kay, Aaron C. & Jost, John T., 2003. "Complementary Justice: Effects of "Poor But Happy" and "Poor But Honest" Stereotype Exemplars on System Justification and Implicit Activation of the Justice Motive," Research Papers 1753r, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    4. Bolton, Gary E, 1991. "A Comparative Model of Bargaining: Theory and Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(5), pages 1096-1136, December.
    5. John R. Carter & Michael D. Irons, 1991. "Are Economists Different, and If So, Why?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(2), pages 171-177, Spring.
    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. Buchan, Nancy R. & Johnson, Eric J. & Croson, Rachel T.A., 2006. "Let's get personal: An international examination of the influence of communication, culture and social distance on other regarding preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 373-398, July.
    2. Burks, Stephen V. & Carpenter, Jeffrey P. & Verhoogen, Eric, 2003. "Playing both roles in the trust game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 195-216, June.
    3. Dickinson, David L. & Masclet, David & Peterle, Emmanuel, 2018. "Discrimination as favoritism: The private benefits and social costs of in-group favoritism in an experimental labor market," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 220-236.
    4. Christian Ewerhart, 2006. "The Effect of Sunk Costs on the Outcome of Alternating-Offers Bargaining Between Inequity-Averse Agents," Schmalenbach Business Review (sbr), LMU Munich School of Management, vol. 58(2), pages 184-203, April.
    5. Werner G³th & Judit Kovßcs, 2001. "Why do people veto? An experimental analysis of the evaluation and the consequences of varying degrees of veto power," Homo Oeconomicus, Institute of SocioEconomics, vol. 18, pages 277-302.
    6. Potters, Jan & Sefton, Martin & Vesterlund, Lise, 2005. "After you--endogenous sequencing in voluntary contribution games," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(8), pages 1399-1419, August.
    7. Stefan Kohler & European University Institute, 2006. "Inequality Aversion and Stochastic Decision-making: Experimental Evidence from Zimbabwean Villages after Land Reform," Economics Series Working Papers GPRG-WPS-061, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    8. Binmore, Ken & McCarthy, John & Ponti, Giovanni & Samuelson, Larry & Shaked, Avner, 2002. "A Backward Induction Experiment," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 104(1), pages 48-88, May.
    9. Smith, Vernon L., 2005. "Behavioral economics research and the foundations of economics," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 135-150, March.
    10. Tine Bock & Iris Vermeir & Patrick Kenhove, 2013. "“What’s the Harm in Being Unethical? These Strangers are Rich Anyway!” Exploring Underlying Factors of Double Standards," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 112(2), pages 225-240, January.
    11. Kerschbamer, Rudolf & Müller, Daniel, 2020. "Social preferences and political attitudes: An online experiment on a large heterogeneous sample," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    12. Cason, Timothy N. & Mui, Vai-Lam, 2002. "Fairness and sharing in innovation games: a laboratory investigation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 243-264, July.
    13. Fisman, Raymond & Kariv, Shachar & Markovitz, Daniel, 2005. "Distinguishing Social Preferences from Preferences for Altruism," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt9q26c4fr, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    14. Clark, Andrew E. & D'Ambrosio, Conchita, 2014. "Attitudes to Income Inequality: Experimental and Survey Evidence," IZA Discussion Papers 8136, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    15. Abbink, Klaus & Darziv, Ron & Gilula, Zohar & Goren, Harel & Irlenbusch, Bernd & Keren, Arnon & Rockenbach, Bettina & Sadrieh, Abdolkarim & Selten, Reinhard & Zamir, Shmuel, 2003. "The Fisherman's Problem: Exploring the tension between cooperative and non-cooperative concepts in a simple game," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 425-445, August.
    16. Philip Babcock & Kelly Bedard & Gary Charness & John Hartman & Heather Royer, 2015. "Letting Down The Team? Social Effects Of Team Incentives," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 13(5), pages 841-870, October.
    17. Bereby-Meyer, Yoella & Niederle, Muriel, 2005. "Fairness in bargaining," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 173-186, February.
    18. Susanne Büchner & Giorgio Coricelli & Ben Greiner, 2003. "New Experimental Results on the Solidarity Game," Papers on Strategic Interaction 2003-30, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group.
    19. Bodo Sturm & Joachim Weimann, 2006. "Experiments in Environmental Economics and Some Close Relatives," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 419-457, July.
    20. Topi Miettinen & Olli Ropponen & Pekka Sääskilahti, 2020. "Prospect Theory, Fairness, and the Escalation of Conflict at a Negotiation Impasse," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 122(4), pages 1535-1574, October.

    More about this item

    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:plo:pone00:0268286. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.