Allocators Maturity as an Explanation for Inconsistency in Cognitive Algebra of Reward Distribution

According to equity theory, reward for a person should be proportional to his input or deservingness. Experimental tests of this ratio rule with information integration theory have not yielded consistent results. The same unidimensional tasks sometimes yielded the theoretical pattern of a slanted barrel, but sometimes a pattern of parallelism as though a subtracting rule were operative. In a series of five experiments performed on colege students and professional managers, reasons for the inconsistency in cognitive algebra of unidimensional tasks were examined. The hypotheses of task simplification, order of presentation of unidimensional and multidimensional tasks, and design complexity were considered and rejected. The hypotheses of allocators’ maturity which attributes inconsistency in cognitive algebra to the incomplete conception of equitable exchange in student population received good support. All tests with managers confirmed the ratio rule but infirmed the subtracting rule of reward allocation. Implications of these findings were discussed for developmental study of cognitive algebra of equity and for study of social behavior in nonstudent population.