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.

Fairness Decision-making of College Students in Social Dilemmas:Effect of Social Value Orientation

Impacts Of Social Comparison And Fairness Facet Preference On Justice Judgments

Differences in Cooperation Between Social Dilemmas of Gain and Loss

The Impact of Information Presented Order on Fairness Judgment Forming

Social Dominance Orientation and Selfish Behaviors in Chinese Adolescents: the Mediating Role of Psychological Entitlement

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

The Development of Children's Preferences for Equality and Equity Across 13 Individualistic and Collectivist Cultures.

Social value orientation modulates fairness processing during social decision-making: evidence from behavior and brain potentials

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

Common and distinct equity preferences in children and adults

Age differences of responders' decision-making in disadvantageous and advantageous inequality contexts in the ultimatum game: The role of social value orientation

The effects of social comparison and depressive mood on adolescent social decision-making

Developmental patterns and computational mechanisms of school-aged children's fairness-related decision making under social comparison

The Cognitive and Neural Mechanisms of Perception of Unfairness and Related Decision-Making Process

The Neurocomputational Mechanism Underlying Decision-Making on Unfairness to Self and Others

Distributive fairness during the transition to adolescence: The role of peer comparison and social value orientation

Social Fairness Study Based on Behavioral Economics Analysis: the Case Study of Singapore, China's Shanghai & Lanzhou

Effects of Facial Trustworthiness and Gender on Decision Making in the Ultimatum Game

The Boundaries of Good Deeds:Public Good Choices in Conflicts between Social Norms and Market Norms-A Study of Students from Shanghai Jiao Tong University

Comprehensive sexuality education weakens the effect of in-group bias on trust and fairness

Social Decision Making in Adolescents and Young Adults: Evidence From the Ultimatum Game and Cognitive Biases