The role of power for distributive fairness
We employ an experimental labour setting to study fairness in the division of gains from productive activity. The focus is on the impact of power structures on allocation decisions and on fairness perceptions. Two types of actors are involved in generating a gain, but only one contributes actively by completing a real-effort task. In three treatments, decision power to divide the gain is assigned (1) to the inactive, (2) jointly to the inactive and the active, and (3) to the active. Results show that the impact of power goes beyond changing final allocations: it also significantly alters fairness perceptions. Decision power - in particular absolute power – mediates and significantly enhances self-serving biases. Results complement studies on the psychology of fairness perceptions. Moreover, the paper discusses implications for organizational design.
|Date of creation:||2007|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: D-68131 Mannheim|
Phone: (49) (0) 621-292-2547
Fax: (49) (0) 621-292-5594
Web page: https://ub-madoc.bib.uni-mannheim.de/view/ubmaseries/90080.html
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Anand, Paul, 2001.
"Procedural fairness in economic and social choice: Evidence from a survey of voters,"
Journal of Economic Psychology,
Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 247-270, April.
- Paul Anand, 2000. "Procedural Fairness in Economic and Social Choice: Evidence from a Survey of Voters," Open Discussion Papers in Economics 27, The Open University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Economics.
- Linda Babcock & George Loewenstein, 1997. "Explaining Bargaining Impasse: The Role of Self-Serving Biases," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 11(1), pages 109-126, Winter.
- James Konow, 2003. "Which Is the Fairest One of All? A Positive Analysis of Justice Theories," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 41(4), pages 1188-1239, December.
- Alexander W. Cappelen & Astri Drange Hole & Erik Ø Sørensen & Bertil Tungodden, 2007. "The Pluralism of Fairness Ideals: An Experimental Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(3), pages 818-827, June.
- Alexander W. Cappelen & Astri D. Hole & Erik Ã˜. SÃ¸rensen & Bertil Tungodden, 2005. "The Pluralism of Fairness Ideals: An Experimental Approach," CESifo Working Paper Series 1611, CESifo Group Munich.
- Gary E Bolton & Jordi Brandts & Axel Ockenfels, 2005. "Fair Procedures: Evidence from Games Involving Lotteries," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 115(506), pages 1054-1076, October.
- Gary E. Bolton & Jordi Brandts & Axel Ockenfels, 2000. "Fair Procedures. Evidence from Games Involving Lotteries," UFAE and IAE Working Papers 483.01, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC).
- James Konow, 2000. "Fair Shares: Accountability and Cognitive Dissonance in Allocation Decisions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(4), pages 1072-1091, September.
- Hoffman, Elizabeth & McCabe, Kevin & Smith, Vernon L, 1996. "Social Distance and Other-Regarding Behavior in Dictator Games," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(3), pages 653-660, June.
- Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L & Thaler, Richard, 1986. "Fairness as a Constraint on Profit Seeking: Entitlements in the Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(4), pages 728-741, September.
- Urs Fischbacher, 2007. "z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(2), pages 171-178, June. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)