Rituals of reason: Experimental evidence on the social acceptability of lotteries in allocation problems

Abstract

We study collective preferences towards the use of random procedures in allocation mechanisms. We report the results of two experiments in which subjects choose a procedure to allocate a reward to half of them. The first possibility is an explicitly random device: the outcome of a lottery. The second is an equally unpredictable procedure with an identical success rate, but without explicit randomization. We identify an aversion to lotteries, particularly when compared to procedures reminiscent of meritocratic ones. In line with the literature, we also find evidence of a preference for control in most procedures.