Social and Moral Distance in Risky Settings

Many socially desirable actions are subject to risk and occur in situations where the others are not anonymous. Assessing whether lower subject-subject anonymity affects behavior when outcomes are risky is likely important but has not been studied in depth so far. Herein, we provide evidence on this issue. In a series of allocation tasks, all of them variations of the dictator game, we systematically vary the party who is exposed to risk and manipulate recipient anonymity by reducing the social and/or moral distance between the two parties. We propose a model that extends previous work by allowing not only for ex ante and ex post fairness but also for altruism. The model is consistent with observed behavior. In particular, a reduction in social and moral distance significantly increases the likelihood of equal split and more than equal split choices.