Just Cheap Talk? Investigating Fairness Preferences in Hypothetical Scenarios

Paul Hufe and Daniel Weishaar

Bristol Economics Discussion Papers from School of Economics, University of Bristol, UK

Abstract: The measurement of preferences often relies on surveys in which individuals evaluate hypothetical scenarios. This paper proposes and validates a novel factorial survey tool to measure fairness preferences. We examine whether a non-incentivized survey captures the same distributional preferences as an impartial spectator design, where choices may apply to a real person. In contrast to prior studies, our design involves high stakes, with respondents determining a real person’s monthly earnings, ranging from $500 to $5,700. We find that the non-incentivized survey module yields nearly identical results compared to the incentivized experiment and recovers fairness preferences that are stable over time. Furthermore, we show that most respondents adopt intermediate fairness positions, with fewer exhibiting strictly egalitarian or libertarian preferences. In sum, these findings suggest that high-stake incentives do not significantly impact the measurement of fairness preferences and that non-incentivized survey questions covering realistic scenarios offer valuable insights into the nature of these preferences.

Date: 2025-04-02
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-dcm, nep-exp and nep-mac
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.bristol.ac.uk/efm/media/workingpapers/w ... pdffiles/dp25810.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bri:uobdis:25/810

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Bristol Economics Discussion Papers from School of Economics, University of Bristol, UK
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Vicky Jackson ().