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 Measures in Relief Resource Allocation Model

An relief resource allocation model with equity constraints

A Multi-Period Model for Relief Resource Allocation Based on Dynamic Vulnerability of Affected Areas

Measuring and Achieving Equity in Multiperiod Emergency Material Allocation.

A Multiobjective Allocation Model for Emergency Resources That Balance Efficiency and Fairness

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

Coordination Between Efficiency and Equity in Relief Allocation Problem Via Demand Updates

Optimization Model of Permanent Basic Farmland Indicators Distribution from the Perspective of Equity: A Case from W County, China

A Model for Distribution of Multiple Emergency Commodities to Multiple Affected Areas Based on Loss of Victims of Calamity

Game Models for Incomplete Put-out Distribution of Emergency Relief Supplies for Natural Disasters

Multiresource Allocation: Fairness-Efficiency Tradeoffs in a Unifying Framework.

Multiperiod Equitable and Efficient Allocation Strategy of Emergency Resources under Uncertainty

Coordinating Efficiency and Equity in Disaster Relief Logistics Via Information Updates

Trade-offs between Group Fairness Metrics in Societal Resource Allocation

Medical Resources Allocation Contributing to Hierarchical Diagnosis

A Bi-Objective Robust Model for Emergency Resource Allocation under Uncertainty

Quantitative Evaluation of China's Disaster Relief Policies: A PMC Index Model Approach

Model of multi-period emergency material allocation for large-scale sudden natural disasters in humanitarian logistics: Efficiency, effectiveness and equity

On Fairness and Efficiency in Nonprofit Operations: Dynamic Resource Allocations

Sustainable infrastructure projects in balancing urban–rural development: towards the goal of efficiency and equity

On the equity-efficiency trade-off in food-bank network operations