Abstract
In our questionnaire experiment we confronted students of economics, law and medicine with distributive situations in different contexts characterised by two features inspired by medical decision problems: First, individual threshold values indicate minimal amounts needed by potential recipients of the given resource to obtain positive benefits. Second, recipients differ with respect to their ability to benefit from the given quantity, which indicates the productivity of the resource. Allocations offered in the questionnaire are theoretically grounded. However, respondents were also able to make their own proposals. Well-known allocation rules, but also new procedures, were witnessed. Two multistage principles were most prominent: After distributing all minimal amounts, in a second step one aims for resource-equality while the other principle in the second step demands the maximisation of the sum of payoffs. Besides threshold values and productivity, the acceptance of different principles also depended on the field of study, the degree of scarcity of the resources and the sequential order of situations.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abellán-Perpiñán JM, Pinto-Prades JL (1999) Health state after treatment: a reason for discrimination?. Health Econ 8: 701–707
Ahlert M, Felder S, Vogt B (2012) Which patients do I treat? An experimental study with economists and physicians. Health Econ Rev 2: 1
Amiel Y, Cowell FA (1999) Thinking about inequality. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Bar-Hillel M, Yaari M (1993) Judgements of distributive justice. In: Mellers BA, Baron J (eds) Psychological perspectives on justice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 55–84
Binmore K, Morgan P, Shaked A, Sutton J (1991) Do people exploit their bargaining power? An experimental study. Games Econ Behav 3: 295–322
Bossert W (1998) Comments on ‘The empirical acceptance of compensation axioms’. In: Laslier JF, Fleurbaey M, Gravel N, Trannoy A (eds) Freedom in economics. Routledge, London, pp 282–284
Camerer C (2003) Behavioral game theory. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Cuadras-Morató X, Pinto-Prades JL, Abellán-Perpiñán JM (2001) Equity considerations in health care: the relevance of claims. Health Econ 10: 187–205
Culyer AJ, Wagstaff A (1993) Equity and equality in health and health care. J Health Econ 12: 431–457
Davis DD, Holt CA (1993) Experimental economics. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Dolan P (1998) The measurement of individual utiliy and social welfare. J Health Econ 17: 39–52
Elster J (1992) Local justice: how institutions allocate scarce goods and necessary burdens. Russell Sage Foundation, New York
Elster J (1995) The empirical study of justice. In: Miller D, Walzer M (eds) Pluralism, justice and equality. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 81–98
Engelmann D, Strobel M (2004) Inequality aversion, efficiency, and maximin preferences in simple distribution experiments. Am Econ Rev 94: 857–869
Faravelli M (2007) How context matters: a survey based experiment on distributive justice. J Public Econ 91: 1399–1422
Forsythe RH, Horrowitz JL, Savin NE, Sefton M (1994) Fairness in simple bargaining experiments. Games Econ Behav 6: 347–369
Gaertner W (2006) A primer in social choice theory. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Gaertner W, Jungeilges J (2002) Evaluation via extended orderings: Empirical findings from Western and Eastern Europe. Soc Choice Welf 19: 29–55
Gaertner W, Schwettmann L (2007) Equity, responsibility and the cultural dimension. Economica 74: 627–649
Gaertner W, Jungeilges J, Neck R (2001) Cross-cultural equity evaluations: a questionnaire-experimental approach. Eur Econ Rev 45: 953–963
Hammond PJ (1976) Equity, Arrow’s conditions and Rawls’ difference principle. Econometrica 44: 793–804
Harsanyi JC (1955) Cardinal welfare, individualistic ethics and interpersonal comparisons of utility. J Polit Econ 63: 309–321
Harsanyi JC, (1978) Bayesian decision theory and utilitarian ethics. Am Econ Rev Pap Proc 68: 223–228
Hurley J (2000) The normative economics of health and health care. In: Culyer AJ, Newhouse JP (eds) Handbook of health economics. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 55–118
Kahneman, D, Varey, C (1991) Notes on the psychology of utility. In: Elster J, Roemer J (eds) Interpersonal comparisons of utility. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 127–163
Konow J (2001) Fair and square: the four sides of distributive justice. J Econ Behav Organ 46: 137–164
Konow J (2003) Which is the fairest one of all? A positive analysis of justice theories. J Econ Lit 41: 1188–1239
Schokkaert E (1999) Tout-le-monde est ‘post-welfariste’: opinions sur la justice redistributive. Rev Econ 50: 811–831
Schokkaert E, Devooght K (2003) Responsibility-sensitive fair compensation in different cultures. Soc Choice Welf 21: 207–242
Schokkaert E, Overlaet B (1989) Moral intuitions and economic models of distributive justice. Soc Choice Welf 6: 19–31
Schwettmann L (2009) Trading off competing allocation principles: theoretical approaches and empirical investigations. Peter Lang, Frankfurt am Main
Sen A (1980) Equality of what?. In: McMurrin SM (eds) Tanner lectures on human values. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Sirkin MR (2006) Statistics for the social sciences, 3rd edn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks
Tsuchiya A, Dolan P (2009) Equality of what in health? Distinguishing between outcome egalitarianism and gain egalitarianism. Health Econ 18: 147–159
Wagstaff A (1991) QALYs and the equity-efficiency trade-off. J Health Econ 10: 21–41
Walzer M (1983) Spheres of justice: a defense of pluralism and equality. Basic Books, New York
Williams A, Cookson R (2000) Equity in health. In: Culyer AJ, Newhouse JP (eds) Handbook of health economics, vol 1b. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 1863–1910
Winkelmann R, Boes S (2006) Analysis of microdata. Springer, Berlin
Yaari M, Bar-Hillel M (1984) On dividing justly. Soc Choice Welf 1: 1–24
Young PH (1994) Equity: in theory and practice. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ahlert, M., Funke, K. & Schwettmann, L. Thresholds, productivity, and context: an experimental study on determinants of distributive behaviour. Soc Choice Welf 40, 957–984 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-012-0652-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-012-0652-8