Abstract:Previous studies have shown that people would like to sacrifice benefits to themselves in order to avoid inequitable outcomes, not only when they receive less than others (disadvantageous inequity aversion) but also when they receive more (advantageous inequity aversion). This feature is captured by the theory of inequity aversion. The present study was inspired by what appears to be asymmetry in the research paradigm toward advantageous inequity aversion. Specifically, studies that supported the existence of advantageous inequity aversion always relied on the paradigm in which participants can determine allocations. Thus, it is interesting to know what would occur if participants could not determine allocations or simply passed judgment on predetermined allocations. To address this, a behavioral experiment (N = 118) and a skin conductance response (SCR) experiment (N = 29) were adopted to compare participants' preferences for advantageous inequity directly when allocations were determined and when allocations were predetermined in an allocating task. In the determined condition, participants could divide by themselves a sum of money between themselves and a matched person, whereas in the predetermined condition, they could simply indicate their satisfaction with an equivalent program-generated allocation. It was found that, compared with those in the determined condition, participants in the predetermined condition behaved as if they liked the advantageous inequity and equity to the same degree (Experiment One) and that the SCRs elicited by advantageous inequity had no differences from those elicited by equity, suggesting that participants did not feel negatively toward advantageous inequity in this situation (Experiment Two). The present study provided mutual corroboration (behavioral and electrophysiological data) to document that advantageous inequity aversion may differ as a function of the individual's role in determining allocations, and it would disappear if individual cannot determine allocations.

Inequity, Resistant Behavior and Efficiency

Advantageous Inequity Aversion Does Not Always Exist: the Role of Determining Allocations Modulates Preferences for Advantageous Inequity

Impact of Unfair Treatment on Efforts

Equity, efficiency, and incentives in a large economy

The Economy Mathematic Model about "fairness is Efficiency"

Equality, equity and incentives: An experiment

Inequity aversion improves cooperation in intertemporal social dilemmas

Equality and efficiency shape cooperation in multiple-public-goods provision problems.

Envy, Malice and Pareto Efficiency: an Experimental Examination

Awareness of Wealth Inequalities Breeds Animosity

Gender differences in the equity-efficiency trade-off

Social dilemmas among unequals

"Fairness preference" in fairness and efficiency:Information and memory effect

Evolution of egalitarian social norm by resource management

Inequity Aversion Preference,Ownership Structure and the Incentive Effect of Executive Compensation:An Experimental Study

Inequality-induced Emotions Might Promote Cooperation in Evolutionary Games

Inequality Aversion or Reciprocity?——An Investigation of Two Kinds of Fairness in the Ultimatum Game

The Design of Team Incentive Model and the Explanation of Free-Riding Problem Based on Inequity Aversion

Inequity-averse Agents' Deserved Concerns under the Linear Contract: a Social Network Setting.

Signaling through Price and Quality to Consumers with Fairness Concerns

Fairness decision-making of opportunity equity in gain and loss contexts