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.

The Opportunity Cost of Debt Aversion

Debt Aversion: Theory and Measurement

Corporate Hedging and the Cost of Debt

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

The relationship between debt aversion and college enrollment by gender, race, and ethnicity: a propensity scoring approach

The debt aversion survey module: An experimentally validated tool to measure individual debt aversion

Intertemporal consumption and debt aversion: a replication and extension

Individual-level loss aversion in riskless and risky choices

Tax avoidance and cost of debt: evidence from a natural experiment in China

Debt Maturity Choice and Firms' Investment

State-contingent debt with lender risk aversion

Demand for Financial Advice: Evidence from a Randomized Choice Experiment

Looming Large or Seeming Small? Attitudes Towards Losses in a Representative Sample

The Effect of Student Loan Debt on Spending: The Role of Repayment Format

Earn More Tomorrow: Overconfidence, Income Expectations, and Consumer Indebtedness

Debiasing the availability heuristic in student loan decision-making

Still in Search of the Sunk Cost Bias

Institutional Investor Attention, Agency Conflicts, and the Cost of Debt

Debt trajectories and mental health

Craving money? Evidence from the laboratory and the field

No evidence for loss aversion disappearance and reversal in Walasek and Stewart (2015).