When Fair Isn’t Fair: Understanding Choice Reversals Involving Social Preferences
B. Douglas Bernheim () and
Journal of Political Economy, 2020, vol. 128, issue 5, 1673 - 1711
In settings with uncertainty, tension exists between ex ante and ex post notions of fairness. Subjects in an experiment most commonly select the ex ante fair alternative ex ante and switch to the ex post fair alternative ex post. One potential explanation embraces consequentialism and construes reversals as time inconsistent. Another abandons consequentialism in favor of deontological (rule-based) ethics and thereby avoids the implication that revisions imply inconsistency. We test these explanations by examining contingent planning and the demand for commitment. Our findings suggest that the most common attitude toward fairness involves a time-consistent preference for applying a naive deontological heuristic.
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (6) Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
Working Paper: When Fair Isn't Fair: Understanding Choice Reversals Involving Social Preferences (2018)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ucp:jpolec:doi:10.1086/705549
Access Statistics for this article
More articles in Journal of Political Economy from University of Chicago Press
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Journals Division ().