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.

Endowment Effect and the Gap Between WTP and WTA

Heterogeneous Choice in WTP and WTA for Renting Land Use Rights in Rural China: Choice Experiments from the Field

The Art of the Deal: Deciphering the Endowment Effect from Traders' Eyes.

An experimental test of the solemn oath in eliciting sincere preferences

The Wage Gap Between State And Private Enterprises In China: Counterfactual Analysis Based On Quantile Regression

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

Mobilising the Public to Fight Poverty Using Anti‐poverty Labels in Online Food Markets: Evidence from a Real Experimental Auction

The Endowment Effect and Repeated Market Trials: is the Vickrey Auction Demand Revealing?

Auction methods of valuation and the endowment effect

How Do Landowners Price Their Lands During Land Expropriation And The Motives Behind It: An Explanation From A Wta/Wtp Experiment In Central Beijing

An Endowment Effect Study in the European Union Emission Trading Market based on Trading Price and Price Fluctuation

Goodwill Can Hurt: A Theoretical and Experimental Investigation of Return Policies in Auctions.

A Study on the Endowment Effect in Second-hand Trading Platforms: Focused on Material Goods and Experiential Goods

Selling Creates A Loss While Buying Generates A Gain: Capturing the Implicit Irrational Bias by the Iat Method

The Present Situation and Future of the Research on the Endowment Effect

A sequential game of endowment effect and natural property rights

A general framework for endowment effects in combinatorial markets

Does a Promise Script Work to Reduce the Hypothetical Bias? Evidence from an Induced Value Experiment

Pre-commitment in Bargaining with Endogenous Credibility

All-pay Auctions with Endogenous Bid Timing: an Experimental Study

Value of Qualification to Buy a House: Evidence from the Housing Purchase Restriction Policy in China